Tariff Wars, the U.S.–Iran Conflict and the New Geography of Shipping, Aviation & Investment.

Global trade is being hit by two different disruptions at the same time.

The U.S.-led tariff confrontation is disrupting the economics of trade. The U.S.–Iran conflict is disrupting the geography of transportation.

One changes where goods remain commercially viable to buy and sell. The other changes how those goods, and the people accompanying global commerce, can physically reach their destinations.

Together, they are forcing cargo, ships, aircraft and capital to search for alternatives.

The strategic question is therefore no longer simply:

How much trade is being disrupted?

A more important question is:

Where is that trade moving — and who will invest quickly enough to capture it?

Tariffs Do Not Only Reduce Trade — They Redirect It

The latest U.S.–Canada confrontation demonstrates the process.

The United States has sharply increased tariffs on significant Canadian exports, while Canada has announced retaliatory measures on U.S. products. The consequences extend beyond the immediate customs bill.

Once a tariff materially changes landed cost, the commercial calculation changes.

Importers search for alternative suppliers. Exporters search for alternative markets. Manufacturers reconsider sourcing. Traders accelerate cargo before new duties become effective. Distribution strategies change and supply chains begin reorganising.

In other words, some trade may certainly disappear because it becomes uneconomic.

But another part moves somewhere else.

That distinction is critical for the transport industry.

A sourcing shift from one country to another changes shipping lanes. A new export destination changes port demand. A change in production location affects air-cargo flows, feeder networks, warehousing and inland transportation.

Tariffs therefore create transport consequences far beyond the tariffed border.

War Creates a Different Kind of Diversion

Now place that economic disruption beside the U.S.–Iran conflict.

The Gulf sits at the intersection of some of the world’s most important maritime and aviation networks.

Disruption around the Strait of Hormuz does not affect Iran alone. It affects vessels, insurers, ports, airlines, fuel costs, schedules and supply chains connecting Asia, the Gulf, Europe and Africa.

Shipping companies reassess voyages.

Insurers reassess risk.

Airlines avoid restricted or dangerous airspace.

Flight distances increase.

Fuel consumption rises.

Aircraft utilisation changes.

Cargo capacity shifts.

Importers begin looking for alternative gateways.

This is where the distinction becomes important:

Tariffs divert trade. War diverts routes.

When both happen simultaneously, the geography of global logistics can change remarkably quickly.

Aqaba: The Cargo Did Not Disappear

Jordan offers a particularly useful example.

Aqaba Container Terminal recorded a reported 155.1% year-on-year increase in transit cargo during the first half of 2026, as disruption around Gulf shipping encouraged traders to seek alternative gateways for regional markets.

Cargo destined for Iraq can enter through Aqaba and continue approximately 760 kilometres by road into Iraq.

The underlying Iraqi demand did not suddenly originate in Jordan.

The cargo changed route.

That change creates economic activity far beyond the port itself.

More containers create demand for terminal handling. More transit cargo requires trucks. Trucks require fuel, maintenance and drivers. Freight forwarders arrange movements. Warehouses and logistics facilities become more valuable. Customs and transit systems process additional movements.

A maritime disruption has therefore created an opportunity across an entire port-to-inland logistics corridor.

This is what trade diversion looks like in the real economy.

Aviation Is Showing the Same Pattern

Aviation tells a similar story.

International air-cargo traffic continued growing globally even as some Middle Eastern corridors experienced substantial disruption.

But the headline growth number hides the more important development: traffic is being redistributed.

IATA’s July 2026 figures showed international cargo demand rising around 4.7% year-on-year. Yet major corridors moved in very different directions: Asia–North America expanded 9.2%, while Europe–Middle East declined 16.1% and Middle East–Asia fell 14.1%.

That is not merely an aviation statistic.

It represents a change in the geography of cargo.

Airspace restrictions and security risks can remove the advantage of what was previously the shortest or most efficient route. Airlines must reroute aircraft, consume additional fuel and reconsider schedules.

Passenger disruption matters as well because international passenger networks provide significant belly-hold cargo capacity.

When passenger flights disappear from one corridor, cargo capacity disappears with them.

But passengers still want to travel.

Shippers still need to move urgent cargo.

They search for another airline, another connection and another hub.

The traffic is contested again.

Disruption Creates Demand for Capacity

This is where the present crisis becomes an investment story.

Disruption itself destroys efficiency and imposes real economic costs.

But diversion creates demand for capacity somewhere else.

If a million tonnes of cargo move away from one gateway, another port, airport or land corridor must absorb them.

That requires infrastructure.

It may require additional vessels, feeder services, aircraft, cargo terminals, container handling equipment, warehouses, trucks, cold chains, customs facilities, digital platforms, insurance and trade finance.

Therefore, investors should not only ask:

Where is trade declining?

They should ask:

Where is displaced trade accumulating?

That is where tomorrow’s logistics capacity may be required.

COSCO: Investment Is Already Looking Beyond the Disruption

COSCO Shipping provides an important signal.

While governments are escalating trade barriers and geopolitical risks are disrupting established routes, COSCO Shipping continues committing billions of dollars to future maritime capacity.

Its latest investment programme includes large LNG dual-fuel containerships alongside smaller regional vessels.

This matters because ships are not investments made for the next six months.

They are long-lived assets.

A shipping group committing billions to vessels during a period of extraordinary geopolitical uncertainty is effectively making a judgement about the future demand for global transportation.

The message is worth considering:

Political fragmentation does not necessarily mean the end of globalisation. It may mean a different geography of globalisation.

Production may move.

Suppliers may change.

Markets may diversify.

Shipping lanes may shift.

Air hubs may gain or lose traffic.

Regional feeder networks may become more important.

Land corridors previously considered secondary may suddenly become commercially relevant.

But the requirement to transport goods remains.

The Opportunity Is Not Limited to Shipping Companies

COSCO is an example, not the whole opportunity.

If trade routes are changing, investment opportunities potentially emerge throughout the transport ecosystem.

Ports positioned outside disrupted areas may need additional handling capacity. Airports may need cargo terminals and cold-chain facilities. Airlines may require additional freighters or new passenger services that also provide belly capacity. Shipping lines may need feeder vessels connecting alternative gateways with mainline networks.

Road and rail operators may gain entirely new transit flows.

Bonded warehouses and inland logistics centres may become viable at locations previously considered peripheral.

Insurance, digital cargo visibility, customs technology and trade finance follow the physical cargo.

This means the investment opportunity belongs not merely to shipowners.

It belongs to airlines, ports, airports, freight forwarders, trucking companies, terminal operators, warehouse developers, technology companies, financial institutions and governments.

Geography Alone Will Not Win

There is an important warning.

Being located beside diverted trade does not guarantee that a country will capture it.

A port cannot capture diversion if vessels wait excessively.

An airport cannot become an alternative hub without slots, handling capability and competitive charges.

A land corridor cannot compete if trucks remain at borders for days.

Investors will not commit capital where regulations can change without warning.

Geography creates the opportunity. Trade facilitation converts it into business.

The emerging winners will therefore be the countries and transport operators capable of combining location with capacity, connectivity, customs facilitation, security, predictable regulation and investment readiness.

Follow the Diversion

The tariff wars and the U.S.–Iran conflict should therefore not be analysed as completely separate events.

One is disturbing established trading relationships.

The other is disturbing established transportation routes.

Shipping and aviation are where those disruptions become physically visible.

Aqaba demonstrates how rapidly cargo can migrate toward an alternative gateway.

Changing air-cargo corridors demonstrate how aviation traffic can redistribute.

COSCO demonstrates the third stage of the process:

investment follows expectations of future transport demand.

This gives us a simple chain:

DISRUPTION → DIVERSION → CAPACITY → INVESTMENT

Governments and transport industries understandably count cancelled flights, delayed ships, additional fuel consumption, higher insurance premiums and lost trade.

They should count something else as well.

Where did the cargo go?

Which port received it?

Which airline carried the passenger?

Which carrier picked up the freight?

Which corridor replaced the disrupted route?

And which country is preparing the infrastructure to retain that traffic?

Because once a temporary alternative becomes reliable, commercial relationships begin forming around it.

Shipping schedules adjust. Warehouses are built. Trucking fleets expand. Airlines develop routes. Traders establish relationships. Investors commit capital.

A temporary diversion can gradually become a permanent trade corridor.

That is why the investment decision cannot necessarily wait for geopolitical stability to return.

The emerging transport map is being drawn during the disruption, not after it.

Money does not wait in the waiting room. Cargo does not wait for politics either.

When one route becomes blocked, risky or uneconomic, trade searches for another — and investment follows the flow.

Muhammad Anwar, CMILT
Founder & Chairman
Trade Facilitation Network (TFN)
Connecting Regions. Enabling Trade.