A strategic perspective on global conflict, commerce
The international armed conflicts across Europe and the Middle East have had devastating impacts on all the countries at war and repercussions of the domino effect on countries both far and near.
Human suffering is incomprehensible, with extensive causalities and displacement. But the pen can bring the naked truth to the forefront and paint the narrative of reconstruction and the long-term implications of war for business and the world.
To date, 500,000 Ukrainians and Russian military personnel have been killed and wounded, with over 40,000 civilian casualties.
February 24, 2022, marked the start of Russia's full-scale war of Ukraine, triggering a seismic shift in the global business landscape. From disrupted supply chains to volatile energy markets, these conflicts present challenges and opportunities for businesses across sectors, demanding strategic adaptation and innovative solutions.
Both the Russo-Ukraine and Israel-Palestine wars are having far-reaching consequences for the rest of the world. Alterations in trade flows, economic structures and established international trade systems have occurred because of the ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East.
The reverberations of the conflict between Palestine and Israel are felt in the tourism, trade, investment and financial sectors of Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon. Disruptions due to the global supply chain are experienced when vessels in the Red Sea are attacked.
Many countries have also altered their trade policies towards self-sufficiency and regionalism and are slowly shifting towards de-globalisation to protect themselves from external shocks.
Alternative transportation modes have gained preference, such as rail freight between Asia and Europe, which benefit companies like Deutsche Bahn and Russian Railways but also impact business transit costs and timelines.
The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine has also significantly impacted trade and investment. It has affected the automotive and hospitality industry in the European region.
According to the World Trade Organisation (WTO), global trade volumes in goods and services have declined by 3.4 per cent. Energy prices have increased by 100 per cent and commodities by 8 per cent. One-third of the international wheat exports and half of the sunflower oil exports were disrupted due to the war.
The exports of materials like palladium and nickel, essential for automotive manufacturing, have also been disrupted, affecting European manufacturers.
Sanctions imposed on these countries by other countries have caused damage to transport links, further straining supply chains and resulting in essential inputs being affected worldwide.
Russia has reoriented its trade in response to sanctions and economic pressures. It has shifted from advanced countries to emerging countries like India, China and Türkiye.
Russia is more dependent on trade with non-sanction countries and redirecting energy exports to new markets at a discounted price compared to global benchmarks.
European countries that were earlier dependent on Russian supplies have also altered trade routes, though they come with increased cost and supply challenges. Middle Eastern countries, such as Qatar, Oman, and Kuwait; and North African Countries, like Algeria, have increased their energy exports to the European Union.
The situation in Europe and the Middle East suggests tension and instability. The humanitarian situation is critical, with millions in need of assistance.
The escalating tensions between these countries complicate the geopolitical implications for international trade. Wars are having a ripple effect on global economic confidence and investment. The situation threatens to exacerbate global inflationary pressures.
The disruptions in food production and exports have contributed to the worldwide food crisis.
The writer is an assistant professor at the marketing and management department of the College of Banking and Financial Studies in Muscat.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times of Oman
an hour ago
- Times of Oman
Oman welcomes ILO decision to upgrade Palestine's status to "Observer State"
Geneva: The Sultanate of Oman expressed its full support for the decision made by the International Labour Conference to upgrade Palestine's membership from a national liberation movement to a "non-member observer state" within the organization. This step is based on legal and institutional considerations consistent with the principles of international justice, equitable representation, and fair participation in multilateral organizations. Khalid Salim Al Ghamari, Undersecretary of the Ministry of Labour for Labour Affairs, delivered a speech at the conference, affirming that the State of Palestine has consistently engaged in active and responsible participation in the organization's work. He emphasized that Palestine has repeatedly demonstrated its commitment to international labour standards and has cooperated constructively with the ILO's various mechanisms. Despite the exceptional challenges it faces, granting Palestine "observer member" status will enhance its ability to convey the realities of Palestinian workers and defend their rights through official and institutional channels, Al-Ghamari noted. He stated that this decision is a technical measure that strengthens the ILO's efficiency and inclusivity, reflecting its commitment to enabling all relevant parties to contribute to achieving decent work goals and promoting fundamental labour rights, in line with the spirit of international conventions and the organization's founding principles. He added that voting in favour of the resolution reaffirms the importance of multilateralism, inclusive engagement, and ensuring representation for all peoples in international organizations. It also reinforces the ILO's role as a platform for dialogue and understanding, upholding its foundational principles away from political tensions or narrow interests. During its 113th session today, the International Labour Conference, at the high-level ministerial meeting in Geneva, adopted the resolution with 386 votes in favour, 15 against, and 42 abstentions. The 113th session of the International Labour Conference began last Monday and concluded today, with the participation of tripartite delegations representing over 187 ILO member states, including governments, employers, and workers.
Observer
9 hours ago
- Observer
Three killed, 49 wounded in air attacks on Ukraine
KYIV: Russia launched an intense missile and drone barrage at the Ukrainian capital in the early hours of Friday and three people were killed, Ukrainian officials said, as powerful explosions reverberated across the country. The attacks followed a warning from Russian President Vladimir Putin, conveyed via US President Donald Trump, that the Kremlin would hit back after Ukrainian drones destroyed several strategic bomber aircraft in attacks deep inside Russia. Kyiv's military administration said three people were killed in the attacks on Kyiv after the mayor initially put the death toll at four. The three were first responders who had rushed to the scene of one of the strikes, Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko said. "Overnight, Russia 'responded' to its destroyed aircraft... by attacking civilians in Ukraine.... Multi-storey buildings hit. Energy infrastructure damaged," Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha wrote on X. President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said 49 people nationwide had been injured in the overnight attacks, which also struck several other towns and cities as well as Kyiv, as he called on Ukraine's Western allies to ramp up pressure on Russia. The air force said Russia had used 407 drones, one of the largest numbers recorded in a single attack. Forty-five cruise and ballistic missiles were also fired, it said. Kyiv's metro transport system was disrupted by a Russian strike that hit and damaged tracks between stations, Kyiv's military administration said. The state rail company said it was also diverting some trains due to rail damage outside the city. Reuters witnesses reported a series of booming explosions powerful enough to rattle windows far from the impact sites. Some Kyiv residents sought shelter in metro stations, or in underground car parks. In the capital's Solomianskyi district, a Russian drone slammed into the side of an apartment building, leaving a gaping hole and burn marks, a Reuters photographer at the scene said. Falling concrete blocks from the building crushed cars parked below. Two police investigators were examining what appeared to be the drone's engine. Earlier in the night, Reuters reporters heard the sound of Russian kamikaze drones buzzing in the sky, accompanied by the sounds of outgoing fire from Ukrainian anti-aircraft fire. Zelenskiy called for concerted pressure on Russia. "If someone is not applying pressure and is giving the war more time to take lives — that is complicity and accountability. We must act decisively," he wrote on X. As well as Kyiv, Russian forces also struck industrial facilities and infrastructure in the western city of Ternopil, leaving parts of it without power, mayor Serhii Nadal said. The regional administration said the attack had injured 10 people and recommended that residents temporarily stay inside due to a high concentration of toxic substances in the air after a fire. Five people were also injured in the northwestern city of Lutsk where an attack damaged private homes, educational institutions and a government building, according to mayor Ihor Polishchuk. Ukrainian military said it had launched a pre-emptive strike overnight on the Engels and Dyagilevo airfields in the Russian regions of Saratov and Ryazan, in addition to striking at least three fuel reservoirs. In one of the most audacious attacks of the war between Ukraine and Russia, Ukrainian spies last weekend destroyed some of Russia's strategic bomber aircraft on the ground using quadcopter drones hidden in wooden sheds. After a phone conversation with Putin on Wednesday, Trump said the Kremlin was planning an unspecified response to the Ukrainian attack on the Russian air bases. — Reuters
Observer
a day ago
- Observer
Is Europe facing civil war?
Whether the debate is occasioned by a polemical book or a movie like last year's 'Civil War', I consistently take the negative on the question of whether the United States is headed for a genuine civil war. In those debates, it's usually liberals warning that populism or Trumpism is steering the United States towards the abyss. But with European politics the pattern is different: In France and Britain; and among American observers of the continent, a preoccupation with looming civil war tends to be more common among conservatives. For years, figures associated with the French right and French military have warned of an impending civil conflict driven by the country's failure to assimilate immigrants from the Muslim world. (The great reactionary novelist Michel Houellebecq's 'Submission' famously imagines this war being averted by the sudden conversion of French elites to Islam.) Lately there has been a similar discussion around Britain touched off by an essay by military historian David Betz that argues that multicultural Britain is in danger of tearing itself apart and lately taken up by political strategist, Brexit-campaign architect and former Boris Johnson adviser Dominic Cummings in an essay warning that British elites are increasingly fearful of organised violence from nativists and radicalised immigrants alike. When I've written skeptically about scenarios for a US civil war, I've tended to stress several realities: the absence of a clear geographical division between our contending factions; the diminishment, not exacerbation, of racial and ethnic polarisation in the Trump era; the fact that we're rich, aging and comfortable, not poor, young and desperate, giving even groups that hate each other a stake in the system and elites strong reasons to sustain it; the absence of enthusiasm for organised communal violence as opposed to lone-wolf forays. Does the European landscape look different? On some fronts, maybe. Tensions between natives and new arrivals are common on both sides of the Atlantic, but ethnic and religious differences arguably loom larger in Europe than they do in the US: There is more intense cultural separatism in immigrant communities in suburban Paris or Marseilles than in Los Angeles or Chicago, more simmering discontent that easily turns to riots. At the same time, British and French elites have been more successful than American elites at keeping populist forces out of power, but their tools — not just the exclusion of populists from government, but an increasingly authoritarian throttling of free speech — have markedly diminished their own legitimacy among discontented natives. This means that neither underassimilated immigrants nor working-class whites feel especially invested in the system, making multiple forms of political violence more plausible: pitting immigrant or native rebels against the government, or pitting immigrants against natives with the government trying to suppress the conflict, or, finally, pitting different immigrant groups against one another. (English cities have already played host to bursts of Muslim-Hindu violence.) Then, too, Western Europe's economies have grown more sluggishly than America's for the last decade, reducing ordinary people's stake in the current order and encouraging alienation and resistance. Finally, there are arguably geographic concentrations of discontent — in the north of England, or in immigrant-dominated cities that Betz warns could become ungovernable — that don't exist in quite the same way in the US. All of this adds up, I would say, to a useful corrective to the progressive tendency to regard America in the Trump era as a great outlier, uniquely divided and deranged and threatened by factional strife, while liberal politics continues more or less as usual among our respectable and stable European allies. Not so: There are clearly ways in which Europe's problems and divides are deeper than our own, with economic and demographic trends that portend darker possibilities and the establishment attempt to keep populist forces at bay may end up remembered as accelerating liberal Europe's downfall. Yet many of the reasons to doubt the imminence of civil war in America still apply to Western Europe. The continent is more stagnant than the US but still rich, comfortable and aged; there's enthusiasm for rioting but rather less for organised violence; and for all the palpable disillusionment, it is hard to glimpse any elite faction yet emerging — right or left, nativist or 'Islamo-Gauchiste' — that would see violent revolution as an obvious means to its ambitions. Meanwhile, there are distinctive European conditions that make civil war less likely there than in the US: Smaller nations with more centralised political systems generally find it easier to police dissent and there's no Second Amendment or American-style gun culture to challenge the European state's monopoly on force. Ultimately, I agree with British writer Aris Roussinos, a pessimist but not a catastrophist, when he writes that the most likely near-future scenarios involve increasing 'outbursts of violent disorder' but not the kind of collapse of central government authority, complete with ethnic cleansing and refugee flows, that the language of 'civil war' implies. And that imprecision matters: As I've suggested before, if you use a civil-war framing to describe a world where rioting is more commonplace and assassination attempts and random forms of terrorism make a comeback, you're describing realities that big diverse societies often have to live with, using terms that misleadingly or hysterically evoke Antietam or Guernica. I don't think America in the 1960s and 1970s experienced a civil war, even though those were certainly chaotic decades. I don't think modern France, with its long tradition of student protests and urban riots, has existed in a perpetual state of civil war. And as we face a future that's clearly more destabilised than the post-Cold War era, it still behooves us to be realistic about the most plausible scenarios: We are still far more likely to be navigating a more chaotic landscape together, as fellow citizens, than shooting at one another across a sectional divide. — The New York Times
