Escalating geopolitical tensions across Europe, the Middle East, and global energy markets are converging into a more volatile and interconnected risk environment. From the European Union’s growing concerns over Russia’s potential militarization of its shadow fleet, to sustained conflict-driven disruptions in energy supply chains, policymakers and markets alike are facing mounting uncertainty. Qorvis intelligence experts around the world share their analysis and insights on this week’s geopolitical and market developments.
European Union warns of militarized turn in Russia’s shadow fleet
Dan Rocha, Partner, Brussels
Russia is escalating rhetoric around direct military protection of the dark fleet. So far, this has gone largely under the radar of U.S. media attention focused on the Middle East, but is a major concern during the March 19, 2026 European Union (EU) Summit. Moscow is now openly considering deploying armed naval patrols and “mobile firing groups” to escort tankers used to circumvent sanctions, alongside installing “defensive capabilities” onboard dark fleet vessels.
This follows a series of European actions detaining and boarding suspected shadow fleet ships, which the Kremlin increasingly frames as hostile interference rather than law enforcement. Senior officials, including Nikolai Patrushev, have signaled that diplomatic and legal tools are no longer sufficient, implying a shift toward hard-power responses at sea. In parallel, Russian policymakers are advancing legal justifications to deploy force abroad under the pretext of protecting Russian citizens, which could be extended to crews or assets tied to these vessels.
EU leaders are increasingly concerned that sanctions enforcement operations could trigger direct confrontation with Russian naval assets. The signals suggest Moscow is preparing to formalize state control over previously deniable shipping operations. This would mark a potential inflection point, where interactions between EU authorities and shadow fleet vessels, which were already tense, risk becoming militarized.
Iran war underscores why SMEs must engage in proactive risk management
Benoît Lioud, Managing Director, Geneva
Energy crises are not limited to sudden and unpredictable price increases as we have seen over the past few weeks due to the conflict in Iran; they are also accompanied by heightened volatility, making cost management even more complex. This poses a major challenge for SMEs, which often lack the financial tools necessary to protect themselves from sustained energy price instability.
The repeated shocks of recent years have rendered obsolete the approach of “waiting out the storm” by absorbing losses in margins. SMEs, whose balance sheets and cash flow are not designed to withstand successive disruptions, must now integrate proactive price risk management as a strategic priority.
For many companies, dynamic price risk management is an unfamiliar field requiring specialized expertise and being responsive to market movements. Energy price volatility reflects complex dynamics, combining economic fundamentals (supply/demand) and geopolitical issues. Companies must therefore continuously adapt to market signals and develop a risk culture to transform this constraint into an opportunity for resilience.
Planning and preparing for geopolitical risk must become the norm, not the exception. From the supply chain disruptions of COVID to the war in Ukraine, and now the conflict in Iran, major market disruptions must be factored into decision-making.
U.S. weighs naval options as Iran keeps up strikes
Tom Sharpe, Senior Advisor, London
Three weeks into the war in Iran, we are seeing a steady drumbeat of drone and missile attacks by Iran across the region, often focusing on energy infrastructure. The UAE continues to be hit the most, accounting for approximately 51.5% of all strikes, compared to Israel’s 15.7%. U.S. and Israeli IDF sortie rates in return are steady.
Iran is content to play a long game now, settling into a Houthi-esque strike tempo from mobile launchers that continue to evade U.S. air cover. The fast attack craft threat and mine threat remain largely unseen so far. As ever, it is not clear if this is because they are being kept back for a rainy day or because they have been destroyed, but knowing which is key to determining what is the timeline for reopening the Strait of Hormuz.
Escorting remains a likely option, although the U.S. Navy has too few ships to do so now, given the current threat. Options involved sailing in more destroyers, allied assistance (reluctant so far), and the USS Tripoli, currently in the Malacca Strait is reportedly heading for the Gulf of Oman. With over 2,300 U.S. Marines embarked, and flying the F-35B stealth fighter jet, she will provide welcome options to the U.S. planners seeking to break the current deadlock when she gets there.
Read Qorvis Senior Advisor Tom Sharpe’s comments to Bloomberg on the Iran war here.
Watch Qorvis Senior Advisor Tom Sharpe’s interview on Real America’s Voice here.
Energy markets jolt as U.S. weighs export limits
Noe Boggan, Analyst, Dubai
As the United States is reportedly considering an oil export ban, this has sparked discussion around the potential for either a partial ban or export tariffs. Forcing U.S. crude into the domestic market could disincentivize production, distorting global markets.
Brent Crude is now approaching $120 per barrel. Gasoline prices have risen by roughly $0.50 per gallon in the United States since the start of the war in Iran. After the attack on QatarEnergy facilities this week, global oil and gas prices soared. Furthermore, beyond the immediate impact on prices, QatarEnergy announced this attack reduced its production ability by 17% for up to five years as its facilities undergo repairs.
In the United States, the Trump administration has announced a release of 172 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), along with a 60-day Jones Act waiver. It is too early to tell if these measures will stabilize prices in the short-term.
U.S. Congress moves from the sidelines to center stage in Iran policy debate
J.P. Carroll, Senior Advisor, Washington, D.C.
The Trump administration reportedly plans to seek $200 billion in additional funding from the U.S. Congress to fund U.S. military operations against Iran. Republicans are expected to support the measure and guarantee its passage, despite Democratic opposition. However, as midterm elections approach, proposals like this will be tougher for a narrow Republican majority to pass.
This week, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified before the U.S. Congress on global threats to the United States and stated when asked about the Iranian regime that it is “intact but largely degraded.” A key Gabbard lieutenant, now-former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Joe Kent resigned this week, in opposition to U.S. military operations against Iran. While Kent’s resignation caught many by surprise, it will not change the Trump administration’s policy against Iran.
