The Chain of Conflict: How Russia's Support Network Disrupts Global Commerce

Russia backs Iran. Iran backs the Houthis. The Houthis fire missiles at ships headed to Israel. Your Amazon package costs more as a consequence.

This isn't some obscure geopolitical theory, it's a domino effect that reaches all the way into your pocket and the bottom line of every major business. What started as military alliances between authoritarian nations has evolved into one of the greatest threats to the way we move goods around the world.

Russia and Iran were not always best friends. They both compete for oil customers and differ on who gets to control the Middle East. Western sanctions changed all that. When you're both locked out of the international financial system, you make do and assist each other.

Iran sends Russia the drones that tear apart Ukrainian cities. Russia sends Iran advanced weaponry and military know-how in return. Both regimes become stronger, and both become more adept at flipping off the West. It's an axis of convenience that's becoming genuinely sinister.

Iran has achieved what most countries can only dream of: getting others to fight their wars. They fund, train, and arm militant proxies all over the Middle East. The Houthis in Yemen are just one piece of this puzzle, but they control a third of the country and have access to some pretty important military equipment.

Here's where it takes an interesting turn: Russia is now not only helping Iran. There are intelligence reports of Houthi leaders visiting Moscow to buy weapons directly. Russia is cutting out the middleman and directly arming Iran's proxies.

The Houthis made international shipping their business when war broke out between Israel and Hamas. They started firing missiles into cargo ships in the Red Sea, one of the world's busiest trade routes. The impact was both direct and vicious.

Red Sea box shipping dropped 90% within two months. Twenty-nine major shipping lines from 65 countries told the risk “no way” and started sending their ships the long way around Africa instead. That tacks on 11,000 more miles, ten more days at sea, and an extra million dollars in fuel costs for every single voyage. Ships that normally carried $1 trillion worth of goods through that pass suddenly couldn't. That's not a typo, $1 trillion with a T.

When the world's shipping lanes are turned into target practice, everybody pays. Companies pass on those added expenses to consumers, which means higher prices on everything from electronics to apparel to food. Supply chains that had been honed over decades were ripped apart overnight. Manufacturers couldn't receive their raw materials on time. Retailers couldn't fill their shelves. The just-in-time delivery system that fuels modern commerce started to collapse.

Insurance companies were charging war-zone premiums for vessels to travel anywhere near the region. Some shipping firms just weren't taking the risk at all anymore, further compounding the shortage. Egypt makes over $7 billion a year from ships that go through the Suez Canal. When cargo ships started going around Africa instead, that income disappeared. For an already economically strained country, losing their single biggest source of foreign revenue hurt.

The scariest part is not the immediate damage, it’s how effective this strategy was. A relatively small group of militants, aided by Iran and increasingly by Russia, were capable of disrupting global trade on a level that any military planner would be envious of. This was no accident. This was a deliberate move to show the world how vulnerable our interdependent economy really is.

And it worked perfectly.

Multinational corporations did not just sit back and take it. They found new suppliers, built new channels, and diversified their supply chains. Some companies discovered that they could purchase materials from other countries. Others invested in more flexible logistics networks. But adaptation costs money. Every backup plan, every alternate supplier, every longer supply route costs money. These costs get transferred down the line until they reach consumers.

The attacks continue as the U.S. launches military strikes against Houthi targets. The militants have said they're not backing off, and their patrons in Iran and Russia have every reason to maintain this pressure.

This is a new normal for global business. Companies now need to plan for the possibility that any major shipping route could become a war zone with little warning. The old model of lean, streamlined supply chains predicated on the cheapest possible routes does not work when those routes can potentially disappear overnight.

We’re living in a world where small players with big patrons can hold international commerce for ransom. The Russia-to-Iran-to-Houthi-to-your-neighborhood-store chain illustrates just how connected everything really is. Companies are discovering they need to have multiple backup plans. Governments are realizing that economic security and military security are no longer separate issues. And shoppers are discovering that geopolitics is not something that happens to other people, it’s something that shows up on your grocery bill.

The global economy will adapt, because it has to. But it will be more expensive, less efficient, and far more complicated than what we’re used to. That’s the real price of this chain of war, not just the short-term disruption, but the permanent alteration of how the world does business.

This is not something that will be going away soon. For as long as Russia and Iran see a benefit to disrupting Western interests, and for as long as they have proxies willing to do the dirty work, international trade will have to operate under these newer, riskier rules.