Analysis of the logistics situation in the Middle East and worldwide by the Experts Club analytical center as of March 2, 2026 (the situation is constantly changing).
According to NOTAM monitoring data, as of March 2, the picture is as follows (in parentheses — the duration of current restrictions, which is not a guarantee of reopening): Iran, Iraq, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Syria, Israel – “total” closure at the FIR/route level, Saudi Arabia – partial closure of corridors near the border with Iraq and in the Persian Gulf area, UAE – formally not “empty sky,” but ESCAT zones have been introduced and commercial traffic is effectively severely restricted.
EU regulators directly classify the situation as high risk for civil aviation not only over Iran, but also over neighboring countries where air defense actions, interception, and spill-over risks are possible.
The key effect is the shutdown or “semi-shutdown” of major Persian Gulf hubs connecting Europe, Asia, and Africa. Reuters and other publications describe this as one of the most severe shocks to civil aviation in recent years, with thousands of cancellations and mass passenger relocations.
The largest regional carriers (hubs):
1) Emirates: has temporarily suspended all operations to/from Dubai until at least 3 p.m. UAE time on March 3.
2) Etihad: all flights to/from Abu Dhabi suspended until 14:00 UAE time on March 3.
3) Qatar Airways: operations temporarily suspended due to the closure of Qatar’s airspace (resumption – after the regulator’s decision).
Large international groups and long-haul carriers are clearing their schedules en masse, as the “hole” in the corridor forces them to either cancel flights or fly long detours (longer, more expensive, with restrictions on crew working hours).
1) Lufthansa Group: flights to a number of destinations in the region suspended until March 8, with some restrictions on Dubai until March 4, plus an announcement that the group will not use airspace (the list includes Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Iran; separately – the UAE until March 4).
2) British Airways: announces the cancellation of some flights and offers free date changes for London-Abu Dhabi/Amman/Bahrain/Doha/Dubai/Tel Aviv routes for the period until March 15.
3) Air India: suspension of flights to/from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Qatar until 23:59 (India) on March 2, plus some flights to Europe.
What is happening with air cargo
Here, the blow is twofold:
1) Belly capacity is disappearing: when the passenger network through the Gulf hubs “shuts down,” the holds of wide-body passenger flights, which usually carry a significant share of urgent cargo, disappear with it. This quickly pushes rates up and overloads the remaining freighter capacity.
2) Express chains and last mile in Gulf countries are disrupted:
1) FedEx: announces the suspension of flights to/from a number of markets in the region and the temporary suspension of pickup/delivery in Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Qatar, and the UAE “until further notice,” warning of increased transit times in other countries in the region.
2) DHL Express: has temporarily suspended international shipments to/from Israel due to the closure of Israeli airspace.
For cargo, this usually means: more “transshipments,” more ground legs, shifting of some flows to alternative hubs, queues for capacity, and increased delivery times even where the skies are formally open.
In addition to countries with closed or restricted skies, the following are also significantly affected:
1) markets associated with transshipment through the UAE and Qatar (Europe – Asia – Africa),
2) India and South Asia (many destinations in the Gulf, plus onward transit),
3) ATP and European airlines, which have to cancel flights or reroute them on long detours, which affects the economics of the flight and punctuality.
In terms of scale, this already looks like a systemic network failure, rather than a local “detour zone”:
1) Thousands of flights have been canceled, and recovery is complicated by the fact that aircraft and crews are “scattered” around the world and need to be physically returned to the correct points in the network;
2) costs are rising across several areas: fuel (longer routes), airport charges for unscheduled landings, compensation/accommodation, and schedule changes; this is also reflected in the market through the reaction of carrier and tourism sector stocks.
3) Regulatory factors are amplifying the effect: EASA warns of high risk in the area, and the US has long had bans/restrictions on flights in certain FIRs (e.g., Iran and Iraq due to SFAR and security NOTAM).
The price of gold and other precious metals rose sharply on Monday due to the escalating conflict in the Middle East.
By 9:57 a.m. ET, April gold futures on the Comex exchange rose about 3.3% to $5,418 per ounce.
Silver futures rose 3.3% to $96.38 per ounce, and platinum futures rose 2% to $2,422 per ounce.
As reported, on Saturday, the US and Israel launched military action against Iran. They carried out more than a thousand missile strikes on Iranian cities, killing Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Iran launched retaliatory strikes against Israel and a number of Persian Gulf countries. In particular, residential areas of the capital of Bahrain were affected, and damage to a number of hotels and the airport in Dubai was reported.
Meanwhile, the price of aluminum on the London Metal Exchange jumped nearly 3% on Monday to $3,231 per ton. It is noted that Iran’s neighbors, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain, are major aluminum producers. According to AZ China, the Middle East accounts for about 9% of global production of this metal.
Earlier, the Experts Club analytical center presented an analysis of the world’s leading gold-producing countries in its video on YouTube channel — https://youtube.com/shorts/DWbzJ1e2tJc?si=BywddHO-JFWFqUFA
EXPERTS CLUB, GOLD, IRAN, ISRAEL, USA
Trade in Ukrainian goods in 2025 remained highly concentrated and with a pronounced import bias, according to a study by the Experts Club analytical center on the top 50 trading partners as of December 31, 2025.
As noted in the study, the top ten countries account for about two-thirds of total trade, with China alone accounting for almost a fifth of turnover. Experts Club founder Maxim Urakin emphasizes: “The overall picture is consistent with the aggregated statistics for 2025: Ukraine’s imports are estimated at about $84.8 billion, exports at about $40.3 billion, and trade turnover at about $125.1 billion.”
China has become Ukraine’s largest partner in terms of trade turnover in the TOP-50 sample – $21.04 billion, with imports of $19.23 billion and exports of $1.82 billion, resulting in a negative balance of $17.41 billion. Urakin believes that “there will be no quick solutions to balance the trade deficit with China without strengthening Ukraine’s industrial export positions” and suggests focusing on localizing part of the supply chains for Ukrainian needs, contract manufacturing, and expanding agricultural and food exports with deeper processing.
Poland ranked second in terms of trade turnover with $13.02 billion, followed by Germany with $9.06 billion, Turkey with $8.95 billion, and the US with $5.69 billion. Commenting on the European direction, Urakin draws attention to the risks of regulation: “The risk factor here is not so much economic as regulatory and political… the issue of quotas and restrictions periodically returns to the agenda.” In his opinion, the key to expanding presence in the EU market is “quality of entry” — standards, traceability, certification, and integration into value chains.
The study also notes the role of markets where Ukraine has a positive trade balance, as well as the importance of trade hubs and logistics. In particular, among the areas that could potentially provide rapid growth with reduced logistics costs and stable maritime routes, the countries where exports already exceed imports stand out, as well as European logistics hubs through which part of Ukraine’s flows pass.
Speaking about the prospects for 2026, Experts Club highlights as key factors the conditions of access to EU markets, institutional agreements with regional partners, and logistics, including the security of sea routes. “The most applicable growth points for Ukraine are a combination of markets with an already positive balance and instruments that reduce barriers: agreements, standardization, and logistics,” Urakin concluded.
More than 15% of Ukrainians noticed that the cost of medicines increased by more than 50% during 2024-2025, while 52% of Ukrainians noted a 20%-50% increase in the cost of medicines.
According to Alexander Pozniy, director of the research company Active Group, this is evidenced by the results of a survey conducted by Active Group and the Experts Club analytical center in early February and presented to Interfax-Ukraine on Friday.
Pozniy noted that a third of those surveyed said that medicine prices had remained almost unchanged, while 2.6% said that they had even decreased.
“In general, it can be noted that the cost of medicines has risen quite significantly, and this is noted by almost the absolute majority (of respondents),” he said, explaining that medicines account for about 10-20% of the household budget, which is why the price increase is so noticeable.
Pozniy noted that, according to the survey, when buying medicines, 25% of Ukrainians pay attention to price, while 24.5% pay attention to effectiveness.
“That is, slightly more than half pay attention to the combination of price and effectiveness of the selected medicines. Therefore, people try to find the optimal combination that would provide the best effect and the least financial burden in terms of treatment,” he said.
In addition, Pozniy said that 28.4% of respondents prefer Ukrainian medicines, while 33.4% prefer imported ones. For 38% of respondents, the country of origin of the drugs does not matter.
According to the results, 31.4% of respondents believe that using electronic prescriptions is very convenient, 44% believe it is somewhat convenient, 18.7% believe it is somewhat inconvenient, and only 5.9% believe it is very inconvenient.
For his part, Maksim Urakin, founder of the Experts Club information and analytical center, noted that the price of medicines is a key factor for Ukrainian citizens.
“Against this backdrop, it is particularly important how state mechanisms for reimbursement and compensation for the cost of medicines work. There is a state reimbursement program, but only 13% of Ukrainians use it. Therefore, reimbursement needs to be promoted among citizens,” he said.
The survey was conducted on the SunFlowerSociology online panel using a representative sample on February 11-12, 2026. The survey involved 1,000 respondents from a representative sample in all regions of Ukraine, except for the temporarily occupied territories.
ACTIVE GROUP, EXPERTS CLUB, MEDICINE, Pozniy, REFORM, URAKIN
Ukrainians cite the outflow of medical personnel and the destruction of medical infrastructure by the aggressor as the main reasons for the deterioration in the availability of medical services during the war.
According to the results of a survey conducted by the research company Active Group and the Experts Club analytical center in early February and presented to the Interfax-Ukraine agency on Friday, 48% of respondents noted that they felt a deterioration in medical services during the war.
Among the main problems of medicine in wartime, 60% of respondents cited the outflow of medical personnel, 22.7% cited the destruction of medical infrastructure, and 13.4% cited a shortage of medicines.
“Considering that the deterioration in medical services is due to the fact that medical facilities have either been physically destroyed or doctors have left them, the fact that only 48% of respondents felt a deterioration is not a bad result. The main problems in medicine during the war are the outflow of medical personnel, followed by the destruction of infrastructure, and then the shortage of medicines. In other words, we see that the main problem is the shortage of medical personnel,” said Active Group founder Andrey Eremenko.
The reforms carried out in the medical sector in recent years have contributed to the fact that medicine continues to function, and the fact that people talk about the lack of improvement or deterioration in the quality of medical services, according to the expert, is still “not subject to harsh criticism.”
According to the survey, 7.2% currently rate the state of affairs in the healthcare system as very poor, 18.7% as rather poor, 16.7% as rather good, and 2% as very good. At the same time, 54.6% gave it an average rating.
At the same time, 29.5% of respondents completely trust their family doctor, and 61.9% trust them partially.
When assessing the possibility of obtaining consultations from a family doctor in their region, 88.8% of respondents said that it was very easy or easy to do so, while 21% said it was very difficult or difficult.
Just over 10% of respondents noted that their local hospital has a sufficient supply of medicines and modern equipment, while 45.8% said that there is a partial supply.
At the same time, 40% of respondents noted that consultations with a specialist take up to a week, 28.4% take 1-2 weeks, and 11.5% take more than a month. In 2024-2025, 68% of respondents regularly paid for medical services themselves.
At the same time, 16% of respondents noted that they spend less than 5% of their family budget on medicine, while almost 21% of respondents reported spending more than 20%.
“The study revealed both the positive and painful aspects of the Ukrainian healthcare system. The most painful issue is the brain drain. But it is important to see the strengths as well. I was very pleased that the level of trust in family doctors is very high. So, the foundation for the development of the healthcare system is there, although, in particular due to the war, there are economic barriers and barriers to accessibility,” said Maksim Urakin, founder of the Experts Club information and analytical center.
50.5% of Ukrainians said they had not seen any improvements after the medical reforms (in particular, the introduction of the National Health Service), 24.7% reported improvements, and another 24.8% were undecided.
At the same time, 64% of respondents said they had encountered unofficial payments in medical institutions, and 52.2% considered the medical system to be corrupt (another 44.3% considered it to be “partially corrupt”). This is according to the results of a survey conducted by the research company Active Group using the SunFlowerSociology online panel.
Active Group Director Oleksandr Pozniy noted that against the backdrop of more critical assessments of the reform, people often separate their trust in a particular doctor from their trust in the system as a whole.
“We can say that family doctors, especially those who have been specifically and consciously chosen, are trusted. It is quite a common situation when people may not trust the system, but trust a specific doctor they know. At the same time, reform exists when it changes everyday experience, and although some changes have taken place, there is still dissatisfaction with this reform,” he said at a press conference at the Interfax-Ukraine agency on Friday.
According to the study, Ukrainians most often assess the state of the healthcare system as “average” (54.6%), “rather poor” (18.7%), or “very poor” (7.2%); 2.9% said “very good” and 16.7% said “rather good.”
At the same time, the level of trust in family doctors remains relatively high: 29.5% of respondents said they completely trust them, 61.9% said they partially trust them, and 8.6% said they do not trust them.
The survey also identified problems with access to medical care and resources at the local level. In particular, 23.8% of respondents believe that it is “very easy” to get a consultation with a family doctor, 55.1% say it is “easy,” 18.1% say it is “difficult,” and 2.9% say it is “very difficult.” Only 10.1% responded that their local hospital has “enough” modern equipment and medicines, 45.8% said “somewhat enough,” and 32.4% said “no.”
In addition, according to respondents, the wait time for an appointment with a specialist exceeds one month in 11.5% of cases, lasts 2–4 weeks in 19.8% of cases, 1–2 weeks in 28.4% of cases, and up to one week in 40.2% of cases.
Active Group founder Andriy Yeremenko attributed some of the negative assessments to the scale of direct household expenses.
“In fact, we see that more than 90% pay for treatment in one way or another, although medicine is formally free. If you don’t have insurance, you still pay — either for medicine or for procedures. Therefore, the issue of financial accessibility remains key for most families,” he said.
According to the survey results, in 2024–2025, 68.2% of respondents said they paid for medical services or medicines themselves on a regular basis, 25.1% said they did so occasionally, and 6.7% said they did not pay.
At the same time, 20.9% reported spending more than 20% of their family budget on medicine, another 23.2% spent 11-20%, 39.8% spent 5-10%, and 16.1% spent less than 5%.
Maksym Urakin, PhD in Economics and founder of the Experts Club information and analytical center, commenting on the survey data, said that high proportions of healthcare costs affect not only well-being but also economic stability.
“As an economist, I want to emphasize that medicine is an integral part of a country’s economic stability, and when healthcare costs erode family budgets, it affects consumption and people’s ability to recover. In international monitoring methodology, it is considered catastrophic if a person spends more than 10% of their budget on medicines. And here we see a sign of a serious financial burden,” he stressed.
Separately, participants drew attention to the dynamics of medicine prices and the effectiveness of compensation mechanisms. Thus, 52.3% of respondents said that the prices of medicines they buy regularly had “increased significantly,” 43.9% said they had “increased slightly,” 3.6% said they had “remained unchanged,” and 0.2% said they had “decreased.”
Regarding the state program for reimbursement of the cost of medicines, 13.1% of respondents said they use it, 70.6% said they do not use it, and another 16.3% said they have heard of it but have not used it. Among those who received medicines under the program, 24.7% said they received them free of charge, and 75.3% said they paid extra.
Grigory Soloninka, a member of the board of the Kyiv Regional Organization “VULT” and professor at the Kyiv Medical University, believes that the pandemic and full-scale war have significantly influenced the perception of the reform, but there are also “positive elements.”
“To a certain extent, there are reforms: there are positive aspects and there are negative aspects. But this negativity was largely influenced, first of all, by the pandemic, then by the war — that is, our reforms began, perhaps, at the wrong time. But there are positives from these reforms, and we see that there is a good program for people over 40, screening,” he said.
The survey also separately assessed the impact of the war on the availability of medical services: 48.1% of respondents reported that they felt access had deteriorated due to the war, 36.9% said no, and 15% were undecided. Respondents identified the outflow of medical personnel (60.3%) as the most acute problem in healthcare during wartime, followed by the destruction of infrastructure (22.7%) and a shortage of medicines (13.4%).
The survey was conducted on February 11–12, 2026, using a self-administered questionnaire, with a sample of 1,000 respondents aged 18 and older throughout Ukraine, excluding temporarily occupied territories. The theoretical statistical error is up to 3.1% with a 95% confidence level.
ACTIVE GROUP, EXPERTS CLUB, Pozniy, SOCIOLOGY, SOLONINKA, SURVEY, URAKIN
