Implications for brand owners, investigators, and regulators, and what to do next (March 2026)

Executive Summary

The rapid escalation of conflict across the Middle East since late February and early March 2026 has generated substantial disruption to regional airspace, maritime ports, shipping corridors, and energy markets, producing far-reaching consequences for international trade flows and regulatory enforcement capacity. Periods of geopolitical instability have historically created favourable conditions for the expansion of counterfeit and illicit trade networks.

Against this backdrop, the present article analyses the evolving regional security environment and assesses how conflict dynamics translate into concrete risks for intellectual property (IP) protection and enforcement. Particular attention is given to strategic commercial hubs such as Dubai and the wider Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which face increased exposure due to their central role in global logistics and re-export trade. The article further proposes a set of immediate and practical measures that rights holders, policymakers, and enforcement authorities should adopt in order to reinforce resilience and effectively “crisis-address” anti-counterfeiting frameworks during periods of geopolitical disruption.

1) Context: A fast moving regional crisis with global trade repercussions

Since early March 2026, escalating regional tensions have generated significant disruptions across the Middle East. At the same time, the conflict has disrupted airspace and transportation networks, complicating the movement of people and goods.

Temporary port closures and security incidents have further strained global supply chains, increasing uncertainty. In addition, intermittent airspace restrictions can hinder enforcement operations, including field investigations and coordinated anti-counterfeiting actions.

2) Why conflict conditions are a force multiplier for counterfeiting

First, armed conflict tends to divert capacity away from regulatory and enforcement functions. As a result, activities such as market monitoring, border inspections, and coordinated enforcement operations could decline, while investigative, evidentiary, and prosecutorial processes could become constrained.

Second, conflicts undermine the predictability and stability of supply chains. Shipping delays, port closures, rerouting of vessels to avoid high-risk zones, and intermittent airspace restrictions could create operational gaps that counterfeiters can exploit. Illicit actors may introduce counterfeit products to replace delayed legitimate goods or conceal illegal shipments within the broader disruption affecting global logistics.

Third, economic pressures heighten consumer sensitivity to price. Spikes in energy costs and wider inflationary trends increase demand for lower-cost alternatives, creating favourable conditions for counterfeit goods to enter the market. Counterfeit networks frequently exploit this environment by offering imitation products that resemble genuine brands, particularly in sectors such as fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG), tobacco, electronics, and automotive components where price differences are immediately noticeable. Financial and economic monitoring institutions have already highlighted market volatility and trade disruptions associated with the current crisis, factors that historically correlate with increased consumption of counterfeit goods.

Fourth, conflict environments tend to expand illicit financial channels. Informal value transfer mechanisms, could become more prevalent during periods of instability. These mechanisms provide counterfeit networks with alternative payment routes that are more difficult to trace and regulate. Financial crime specialists have raised concerns about the resurgence of such channels in the current crisis, while regional authorities have simultaneously called for strengthened anti–money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CTF) controls to mitigate these risks.

3) The implications of this crisis for brand protection

3.1 A wider geographic footprint and sharper logistics shock

In contrast to previous regional flare-ups, the current escalation is simultaneously impacting multiple critical nodes within the regional logistics network. These include the temporary suspension of operations at a major Gulf hub port, congestion at a key global energy chokepoint, and intermittent airspace disruptions across several countries. The scale and concurrence of these disruptions heighten the likelihood of counterfeit goods entering markets through maritime “gray routes,” diverted air cargo channels, and transshipment via unconventional corridors, as shipping companies and freight forwarders rapidly reroute operations to mitigate emerging risks.

3.2 Humanitarian strain intersects with public health risks

Damage to healthcare infrastructure during periods of armed conflict places additional strain on pharmaceutical supply chains sectors that have historically been prime targets for counterfeiters, particularly when legitimate stock becomes scarce, or distribution networks are disrupted. International organisations have already highlighted the mounting pressure on health systems amid the current escalation, increasing the likelihood that falsified or substandard medicines and medical products may infiltrate markets both within the conflict zone and in neighbouring countries.

3.3 Digital marketplaces surge as physical retail wobbles

Periods of restricted mobility or shifts in consumer behavior toward online purchasing, often driven by insecurity or transport disruptions, tend to prompt counterfeit networks to increase their activity on e-commerce marketplaces and social media platforms. A similar trend is likely to emerge in 2026 as flight schedules, airport operations, and cross-border travel remain unstable. Consequently, digital platforms could become a central arena for enforcement, requiring heightened attention from rights holders both during and in the aftermath of the crisis.

4) Why the GCC are high exposure zones

At the macroeconomic level, the Gulf Cooperation Council’s position as a major trade and aviation hub amplifies the impact of airspace restrictions, port congestion, and rising insurance premiums. Even temporary operational suspensions: such as those reported following drone-related incidents can trigger prolonged disruptions to shipping schedules and logistics routes. During such periods of instability, counterfeit consignments may be more easily concealed, mis-declared, or blended with legitimate cargo. Furthermore, partial resumptions of operations do not immediately restore normal trade flows, as shipment backlogs and crew rotation constraints may persist, prolonging the elevated risk environment.

5) Product categories and channels most at risk

• Pharmaceuticals and medical devices: Exposure risks increase significantly when healthcare systems and medical supply chains are under strain, particularly in situations where humanitarian corridors lack consistent monitoring. Under comparable crisis conditions, falsified medical products including antibiotics, analgesics, and emergency-use supplies have historically proliferated, driven by shortages and urgent demand.
• Automotive parts and electronics: Logistics disruptions such as shipping reroutes and port delays create opportunities for counterfeit products to enter the market, particularly safety-critical automotive components (e.g., brake pads and airbags) and consumer electronics such as chargers and batteries. These counterfeit goods may replace delayed legitimate products, especially in markets already affected by inflationary pressures and currency volatility.
• Fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG), tobacco, cosmetics, and personal care products: As fuel-related cost increases translate into higher retail prices, demand for lower-cost alternatives tends to rise, allowing counterfeit products to capture greater market share. This risk becomes more pronounced when brand owners’ last-mile distribution channels are disrupted. Historical customs and enforcement data link periods of macroeconomic instability with increased volumes of intellectual property–infringing goods across these product categories.
• Online marketplaces: The volume of listings for imitation or brand-bearing goods on digital platforms often increases when oversight in physical markets weakens. As commercial activity shifts online during periods of disruption, strengthening platform monitoring, takedown mechanisms, and evidence preservation procedures becomes critical for effective enforcement in and around conflict-affected regions.

6) Enforcement reality check: constraints you should plan for

• Mobility constraints: Investigative activities that depend on travel, on-site inspections, or coordinated enforcement actions may encounter significant scheduling uncertainty due to airspace restrictions and frequent flight disruptions. To mitigate delays, it is advisable to allocate additional lead time and adopt “local-first” response frameworks that rely on pre-vetted in-country partners capable of addressing incidents without requiring immediate international deployment.
• Border and customs pressures: During periods of crisis, enforcement authorities often prioritise security screening and emergency response, which can reduce the scope and frequency of routine intellectual property inspections. In such circumstances, intelligence-led targeting becomes increasingly critical. Pro-active notifications to Customs by rights holders of potentially problematic shipments can help ensure that suspicious consignments receive attention even when inspection capacity is limited.
• Information-sharing challenges: Geopolitical tensions and heightened operational security considerations may hinder cross-border collaboration among enforcement authorities. To sustain cooperation under these conditions, it is beneficial to utilise established multilateral mechanisms—such as Interpol notifications, World Customs Organisation Regional Intelligence Liaison Office (RILO) channels, and MENAFATF coordination frameworks—as well as existing memoranda of understanding with GCC partners, which can help maintain operational continuity when bilateral engagement becomes more constrained.

7) Strategy: Crisis proofing anti counterfeiting programs

7.1 Supply chain integrity and product authentication

• Expand serialisation and traceability systems. Implement or broaden item-level serialisation for high-risk stock keeping units (SKUs), complemented by digital product passports that facilitate verification by both field investigators and consumers. In disrupted logistics environments, serialisation enables faster identification and triage of suspicious consignments while strengthening the evidentiary foundation required for enforcement actions and prosecutions.
• Strengthen “first-mile” supply chain controls. Enhance oversight of vendors and contract manufacturers in source markets through more rigorous audits and supplier verification processes. For high-risk product categories, incorporate random destructive testing to detect potential irregularities. When physical travel is restricted, remote audit methodologies—such as video verification, timestamped documentation, and geo-tagged product sampling—can help maintain oversight and operational continuity.

7.2 Intelligence led enforcement and investigations

• Develop adaptive risk models linked to logistics indicators. Integrate data sources such as AIS and port-call information (through logistics partners), airspace NOTAM notifications, and carrier advisories with existing seizure intelligence to anticipate potential diversion points as transportation routes shift. Particular attention should be directed toward transshipment hubs affected by congestion in the Strait of Hormuz or operational slowdowns at regional ports.
• Enhance “local-first” incident response capabilities. Provide in-region investigators with standardised evidence collection kits, clear chain-of-custody procedures, and secure mobile data-capture systems. Such measures ensure that investigative activities and case development can continue uninterrupted even when international legal teams are unable to travel.

7.3 Digital enforcement at scale

• Broaden surveillance of online marketplaces. Expand monitoring across regional e-commerce platforms and social commerce channels and establish pre-approved emergency takedown arrangements with platform operators to reduce response times when suspicious activity surges. Monitoring frameworks should also update keyword lists and image-hash databases to reflect crisis-related product claims, such as “relief,” “aid,” or “shortage” which counterfeit sellers frequently exploit.
• Safeguard digital evidence for potential criminal proceedings. Ensure that captured listings include comprehensive records such as seller identification details, payment information, and communication exchanges. Where relevant, collaborate with anti–money laundering (AML) teams to trace financial flows linked to informal value transfer mechanisms, thereby facilitating potential referrals to financial intelligence units during subsequent investigations.

7.4 Partnerships and policy engagement

• Proactively coordinate with GCC customs authorities and intellectual property enforcement units. Provide risk heatmaps identifying high-exposure HS codes and trade lanes, share reference samples of counterfeit products alongside serialisation guidance, and request targeted inspection or detention of high-risk consignments during periods when enforcement capacity is limited. Established guidance from the World Customs Organisation (WCO) supports intelligence-driven targeting strategies, particularly in environments where resources are constrained.
• Integrate enforcement efforts with AML/CTF priorities. Work in coordination with national authorities aligned with the Middle East and North Africa Financial Action Task Force (MENAFATF) to highlight indicators of trade-based money laundering linked to counterfeit revenues. This alignment is increasingly important as regulators intensify their focus on illicit financial flows that may expand during periods of conflict and regional instability.

7.5 Business continuity and governance

• Establish defined crisis escalation triggers. Identify objective indicators, such as changes in NOTAM status, transit delays through the Strait of Hormuz, or elevated port security alerts that can automatically prompt the strengthening of anti-counterfeiting measures. These triggers may include increasing inspection activities, allocating additional resources for digital marketplace monitoring, and expediting legal approvals for urgent enforcement actions.
• Conduct scenario-based testing of legal enforcement pathways. Pre-assess and secure approval for potential civil, administrative, and, where applicable, criminal enforcement mechanisms within priority jurisdictions to ensure that case initiation is not delayed during periods of crisis. Contingency options should also be developed for situations in which criminal enforcement channels are temporarily unavailable or suspended.

8) Measuring impact: KPIs for crisis performance

To ensure your program is mitigating risk during the crisis, track:

• Operational response cycle time during transport disruptions. Measure the time required to move from intelligence detection to enforcement action during periods of airspace or port disruption, comparing baseline performance with crisis conditions. The objective is to maintain intelligence-to-takedown timelines within predefined thresholds despite fluctuations in travel and shipping operations.
• Rate of digital enforcement activity. Track indicators such as the number of platform takedowns per week and the volume of evidence packages referred to law enforcement authorities, particularly in markets experiencing the most significant logistics disruptions or inflationary pressures.
• Serialisation detection at key distribution points. Monitor the frequency of serialisation verification alerts at distribution hubs located near major rerouting corridors, which may signal attempts to introduce counterfeit consignments during supply chain diversions.
• Outputs from customs cooperation. Evaluate enforcement outcomes such as targeted cargo holds and coordinated operations achieved through intelligence briefings provided to GCC customs authorities and partner agencies under World Customs Organisation (WCO) cooperation frameworks.

9) Looking ahead: From reactive to resilient

Two fundamental considerations should inform strategic planning. First, geopolitical instability can no longer be regarded as an exceptional risk for brand protection; rather, it has become a recurring characteristic of the global operating environment. Second, counterfeit networks demonstrate a high degree of adaptability, frequently adjusting their products, trade routes, and payment mechanisms within weeks—or even days—rather than over extended timeframes. By strengthening dynamic intelligence capabilities, establishing crisis-response triggers, enhancing supply chain authentication mechanisms, and cultivating robust partnerships with customs authorities and anti–money laundering (AML) institutions, rights holders can significantly mitigate the surge in counterfeit activity that typically accompanies periods of regional instability.

International organisations continue to emphasize that the broader economic consequences of the 2026 crisis will largely depend on its duration and intensity. In the meantime, fluctuations in oil prices, uncertainty in shipping operations, and volatility in financial markets are likely to sustain unstable supply and demand conditions—an environment that historically creates favourable opportunities for illicit trade. Under such circumstances, investing in resilience and proactive risk mitigation becomes not only prudent but essential.

Conclusion

The escalation of the Middle East crisis in 2026 is rapidly transforming the anti-counterfeiting environment. Disruptions in logistics networks, the diversion of enforcement resources, and rising inflationary pressures are converging to create conditions that counterfeit networks can readily exploit particularly in sectors such as pharmaceuticals, automotive components, electronics, and fast-moving consumer goods. As a major trade and aviation gateway, the broader GCC region face heightened vulnerability during this period of maritime congestion, port disruptions, and airspace instability.

Addressing these risks requires a clear and proactive response. Priority measures include accelerating the implementation of serialisation and traceability systems, shifting toward intelligence-driven targeting strategies, strengthening digital enforcement capabilities, and reinforcing collaboration with customs authorities and anti–money laundering (AML) institutions. In times of crisis, the effectiveness of brand protection efforts ultimately depends on speed of response, strategic anticipation, and the strength of institutional partnerships. Without such measures, illicit trade networks may exploit the disruption and become more deeply embedded within affected markets.

For more information, please contact our Anti-Counterfeiting Manager Wissam Aoudi.