Middle East Conflict 2026: External Shock, Domestic Pressure— A Survey-Based Assessment of Economic and Food Security Risks
The evolving phase of the Middle East conflict in 2026 is no longer perceived as a distant geopolitical disruption. For countries across the Global South, it is increasingly experienced as an immediate economic and social reality—one that travels through energy prices, supply chains, and household consumption patterns.
This expert survey, conducted by the Social Research Center, reveals a consistent perception: the crisis is not isolated, but layered. It intersects with existing structural vulnerabilities, amplifying inflationary pressures, exposing dependencies, and intensifying political and fiscal constraints. Rather than a singular shock, it represents a systemic stress test, where global instability meets domestic fragility.
The findings also demonstrate how modern geopolitical crises are no longer confined by geography. A conflict thousands of kilometers away now directly affects transportation costs in Bogotá, fertilizer prices in Lima, and food affordability for ordinary households across Latin America. In this sense, the Middle East crisis has become more than an external event—it has evolved into a revealing test of resilience, governance capacity, and economic adaptability in developing economies.
This expert survey, conducted by the Social Research Center, reveals a consistent perception: the crisis is not isolated, but layered. It intersects with existing structural vulnerabilities, amplifying inflationary pressures, exposing dependencies, and intensifying political and fiscal constraints. Rather than a singular shock, it represents a systemic stress test, where global instability meets domestic fragility.
The findings also demonstrate how modern geopolitical crises are no longer confined by geography. A conflict thousands of kilometers away now directly affects transportation costs in Bogotá, fertilizer prices in Lima, and food affordability for ordinary households across Latin America. In this sense, the Middle East crisis has become more than an external event—it has evolved into a revealing test of resilience, governance capacity, and economic adaptability in developing economies.
Inflation as the Primary Transmission Channel
For most respondents, inflation represents the clearest and fastest consequence of
the conflict. Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza, Industrial Engineer and Laboratory
Coordinator at Excomin Business Group in Colombia, explained that “the new phase of
the conflict in the Middle East is generating concern in Colombia primarily due to its
indirect effects on economies such as ours, which remain sensitive to changes in
international prices, especially for fuel and imported agricultural inputs such as
fertilizers.” According to her, these pressures directly affect “cost of living, inflation,
and consequently, the food security of many families.”
Samuel Yazo, Structured Finance Analyst at Crisil in Colombia, similarly described the
situation as “a significant external shock for Colombia, primarily through increased
international prices for energy, food, and production inputs.” Although higher oil
prices may temporarily increase export revenues, he emphasized that these gains are
often overshadowed by “domestic inflationary pressures that raise the costs of
transportation, production, and basic goods.”
The same concern is visible in Peru. Dario Roger Leon Menacho, Agricultural Engineer
and Production Manager at Fresura de los Andes, warned that “as global oil prices rise,
Peru, which imports much of its fuel, faces more expensive energy, putting pressure
on inflation and depreciating the sol.” He further noted that higher fertilizer prices
increase agricultural production costs, which are then transferred to consumers
through higher food prices.
Collectively, the responses suggest that inflation is not merely an economic side effect
of the conflict. It is the principal mechanism through which distant geopolitical
instability becomes a daily domestic reality.
Energy, Agriculture, and Logistics: The Core Impact Nexus
The survey reveals a tightly interconnected system where disruptions in one sector
cascade into others. Andres Michielin Escobar, B2B Alliance Manager at Viventa
(Colombia), explains that “rising oil prices… increase the cost of transportation,
production, and food,” generating “economic pressure on households.”
Agriculture is particularly exposed. Mateo Federico González Cifuente, Assistant to
the Vice President at FINAGRO in Colombia, stressed that the conflict could generate
“cost-push inflation, primarily affecting food,” while noting that “urea and other
nitrogen fertilizers have skyrocketed between 35% and 45%, and the country imports
75% of its demand.” This dependence significantly limits the ability of domestic
producers to shield themselves from global disruptions.
Meanwhile, global trade disruptions amplify these pressures. Nicole Gonzales, Foreign
Trade Analyst at White Lion Foods (Peru), observes that “maritime freight rates… have
increased exponentially, and shipping lines are not offering many routes,” illustrating
how logistics constraints translate directly into higher domestic costs.
Together, these dynamics form a reinforcing cycle: energy costs drive logistics,
logistics drive food prices, and food prices intensify social and economic pressure.
Policy Dilemmas: Stability vs. Social Protection
Governments are confronted with increasingly complex trade-offs. Camilo Bernal,
Senior Field Coordinator at YanHass (Colombia), frames the challenge as managing
“external impact without exacerbating internal imbalances,” a task that requires
balancing short-term interventions with long-term stability.
Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza emphasizes the need to “balance fiscal stability
with protecting the population's purchasing power,” highlighting the tension between
maintaining subsidies and preserving fiscal discipline.
This tension is evident in ongoing policy debates. Andres Michielin Escobar noted that
“there is disagreement about whether to maintain subsidies or raise prices, while
others fear the social impact of reducing state support.” This debate reflects a
broader regional dilemma: policies designed to protect fiscal sustainability may
simultaneously increase social pressure.
At a structural level, the crisis is pushing policymakers toward deeper reflection.
Mateo Federico González Cifuente argues that “resilience is not improvised: it is built
with foresight and institutional frameworks,” underscoring the need to move beyond
reactive policies toward long-term transformation.
Business Adaptation: From Efficiency to Resilience
While governments balance competing priorities, businesses are increasingly focused
on adaptation. The survey highlights a shift from short-term efficiency toward longterm
resilience.
Andres Michielin Escobar captures this shift succinctly: “in volatile environments, it's
not the biggest that survives, but the one that adapts best.” This adaptability includes
diversifying suppliers, optimizing operations, and anticipating market fluctuations.
Samuel Yazo emphasizes the importance of “risk management strategies, supplier
diversification, and the adoption of technologies that improve productivity,” while
Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza points to “financial planning, risk diversification,
and coordination” as essential tools.
Across sectors, the message is consistent: resilience is becoming the defining
capability in an increasingly volatile global environment.
Fragmented Consensus: Agreement on Risks, Division on Responses
Despite widespread recognition of the risks, there is little agreement on how to
respond. Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza notes that “there is no complete
consensus… differences arise in the strategies,” a pattern observed across both
Colombia and Peru.
Andres Michielin Escobar provides a sharper characterization: “the only thing
everyone agrees on is the diagnosis… but ‘how to respond’ remains the
battleground.”
This fragmentation reflects structural constraints, including political polarization, fiscal
limitations, and competing economic priorities. While stakeholders share a common
understanding of the problem, their proposed solutions diverge significantly, limiting
the potential for coordinated action.
Forward Outlook: Crisis as Catalyst
Looking ahead, respondents identify a clear progression of impacts. In the short term,
rising prices and supply disruptions dominate. In the medium term, economic growth
slows and fiscal pressures intensify. In the long term, structural transformation
becomes unavoidable.
Camilo Bernal suggests that prolonged pressure could lead to “structural adjustments
in energy, production, and economic policy,” while Samuel Yazo highlights the
potential to “diversify the productive structure and reduce dependence on external
shocks.”
However, these opportunities are accompanied by risks. Without effective
coordination, the same pressures driving adaptation could deepen inequality and
social instability.
Global South: Limited Influence, Strategic Learning
The survey shows strong agreement that countries in the Global South have limited
direct influence over the conflict itself. However, their capacity for adaptation and
learning remains significant.
Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza emphasizes the importance of “reduce
dependence on external market strengthen local production… and improve
resilience,” while Mateo Federico González Cifuente highlights that vulnerability is not
temporary but structural.
At the same time, respondents point to opportunities for regional cooperation and
strategic repositioning. By strengthening local production, diversifying trade
relationships, and investing in resilience, countries can transform external shocks into
drivers of long-term change.
Conclusion
The 2026 Middle East conflict is no longer a distant geopolitical event observed from
afar. Through inflation, food insecurity, supply chain disruptions, and fiscal pressure, it
is already reshaping economic realities across Latin America.
For countries such as Colombia and Peru, the crisis has exposed structural
vulnerabilities that extend far beyond temporary market volatility. It has revealed how
deeply interconnected the global economy has become—and how rapidly external
instability can transform into domestic pressure.
At the same time, the survey reflects a growing awareness that resilience cannot rely
solely on emergency responses. Diversification, institutional planning, stronger local
production, and regional cooperation are increasingly viewed as essential components
of long-term stability.
As Mateo Federico González Cifuente reminds us, “resilience is not improvised: it is
built with foresight and institutional frameworks.” In an era defined by recurring
geopolitical shocks, that distinction may ultimately determine which economies
merely endure crises—and which successfully adapt beyond them.
For most respondents, inflation represents the clearest and fastest consequence of
the conflict. Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza, Industrial Engineer and Laboratory
Coordinator at Excomin Business Group in Colombia, explained that “the new phase of
the conflict in the Middle East is generating concern in Colombia primarily due to its
indirect effects on economies such as ours, which remain sensitive to changes in
international prices, especially for fuel and imported agricultural inputs such as
fertilizers.” According to her, these pressures directly affect “cost of living, inflation,
and consequently, the food security of many families.”
Samuel Yazo, Structured Finance Analyst at Crisil in Colombia, similarly described the
situation as “a significant external shock for Colombia, primarily through increased
international prices for energy, food, and production inputs.” Although higher oil
prices may temporarily increase export revenues, he emphasized that these gains are
often overshadowed by “domestic inflationary pressures that raise the costs of
transportation, production, and basic goods.”
The same concern is visible in Peru. Dario Roger Leon Menacho, Agricultural Engineer
and Production Manager at Fresura de los Andes, warned that “as global oil prices rise,
Peru, which imports much of its fuel, faces more expensive energy, putting pressure
on inflation and depreciating the sol.” He further noted that higher fertilizer prices
increase agricultural production costs, which are then transferred to consumers
through higher food prices.
Collectively, the responses suggest that inflation is not merely an economic side effect
of the conflict. It is the principal mechanism through which distant geopolitical
instability becomes a daily domestic reality.
Energy, Agriculture, and Logistics: The Core Impact Nexus
The survey reveals a tightly interconnected system where disruptions in one sector
cascade into others. Andres Michielin Escobar, B2B Alliance Manager at Viventa
(Colombia), explains that “rising oil prices… increase the cost of transportation,
production, and food,” generating “economic pressure on households.”
Agriculture is particularly exposed. Mateo Federico González Cifuente, Assistant to
the Vice President at FINAGRO in Colombia, stressed that the conflict could generate
“cost-push inflation, primarily affecting food,” while noting that “urea and other
nitrogen fertilizers have skyrocketed between 35% and 45%, and the country imports
75% of its demand.” This dependence significantly limits the ability of domestic
producers to shield themselves from global disruptions.
Meanwhile, global trade disruptions amplify these pressures. Nicole Gonzales, Foreign
Trade Analyst at White Lion Foods (Peru), observes that “maritime freight rates… have
increased exponentially, and shipping lines are not offering many routes,” illustrating
how logistics constraints translate directly into higher domestic costs.
Together, these dynamics form a reinforcing cycle: energy costs drive logistics,
logistics drive food prices, and food prices intensify social and economic pressure.
Policy Dilemmas: Stability vs. Social Protection
Governments are confronted with increasingly complex trade-offs. Camilo Bernal,
Senior Field Coordinator at YanHass (Colombia), frames the challenge as managing
“external impact without exacerbating internal imbalances,” a task that requires
balancing short-term interventions with long-term stability.
Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza emphasizes the need to “balance fiscal stability
with protecting the population's purchasing power,” highlighting the tension between
maintaining subsidies and preserving fiscal discipline.
This tension is evident in ongoing policy debates. Andres Michielin Escobar noted that
“there is disagreement about whether to maintain subsidies or raise prices, while
others fear the social impact of reducing state support.” This debate reflects a
broader regional dilemma: policies designed to protect fiscal sustainability may
simultaneously increase social pressure.
At a structural level, the crisis is pushing policymakers toward deeper reflection.
Mateo Federico González Cifuente argues that “resilience is not improvised: it is built
with foresight and institutional frameworks,” underscoring the need to move beyond
reactive policies toward long-term transformation.
Business Adaptation: From Efficiency to Resilience
While governments balance competing priorities, businesses are increasingly focused
on adaptation. The survey highlights a shift from short-term efficiency toward longterm
resilience.
Andres Michielin Escobar captures this shift succinctly: “in volatile environments, it's
not the biggest that survives, but the one that adapts best.” This adaptability includes
diversifying suppliers, optimizing operations, and anticipating market fluctuations.
Samuel Yazo emphasizes the importance of “risk management strategies, supplier
diversification, and the adoption of technologies that improve productivity,” while
Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza points to “financial planning, risk diversification,
and coordination” as essential tools.
Across sectors, the message is consistent: resilience is becoming the defining
capability in an increasingly volatile global environment.
Fragmented Consensus: Agreement on Risks, Division on Responses
Despite widespread recognition of the risks, there is little agreement on how to
respond. Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza notes that “there is no complete
consensus… differences arise in the strategies,” a pattern observed across both
Colombia and Peru.
Andres Michielin Escobar provides a sharper characterization: “the only thing
everyone agrees on is the diagnosis… but ‘how to respond’ remains the
battleground.”
This fragmentation reflects structural constraints, including political polarization, fiscal
limitations, and competing economic priorities. While stakeholders share a common
understanding of the problem, their proposed solutions diverge significantly, limiting
the potential for coordinated action.
Forward Outlook: Crisis as Catalyst
Looking ahead, respondents identify a clear progression of impacts. In the short term,
rising prices and supply disruptions dominate. In the medium term, economic growth
slows and fiscal pressures intensify. In the long term, structural transformation
becomes unavoidable.
Camilo Bernal suggests that prolonged pressure could lead to “structural adjustments
in energy, production, and economic policy,” while Samuel Yazo highlights the
potential to “diversify the productive structure and reduce dependence on external
shocks.”
However, these opportunities are accompanied by risks. Without effective
coordination, the same pressures driving adaptation could deepen inequality and
social instability.
Global South: Limited Influence, Strategic Learning
The survey shows strong agreement that countries in the Global South have limited
direct influence over the conflict itself. However, their capacity for adaptation and
learning remains significant.
Lorraine Elizabeth Castro Mendoza emphasizes the importance of “reduce
dependence on external market strengthen local production… and improve
resilience,” while Mateo Federico González Cifuente highlights that vulnerability is not
temporary but structural.
At the same time, respondents point to opportunities for regional cooperation and
strategic repositioning. By strengthening local production, diversifying trade
relationships, and investing in resilience, countries can transform external shocks into
drivers of long-term change.
Conclusion
The 2026 Middle East conflict is no longer a distant geopolitical event observed from
afar. Through inflation, food insecurity, supply chain disruptions, and fiscal pressure, it
is already reshaping economic realities across Latin America.
For countries such as Colombia and Peru, the crisis has exposed structural
vulnerabilities that extend far beyond temporary market volatility. It has revealed how
deeply interconnected the global economy has become—and how rapidly external
instability can transform into domestic pressure.
At the same time, the survey reflects a growing awareness that resilience cannot rely
solely on emergency responses. Diversification, institutional planning, stronger local
production, and regional cooperation are increasingly viewed as essential components
of long-term stability.
As Mateo Federico González Cifuente reminds us, “resilience is not improvised: it is
built with foresight and institutional frameworks.” In an era defined by recurring
geopolitical shocks, that distinction may ultimately determine which economies
merely endure crises—and which successfully adapt beyond them.
Shadows of the Conquistadors: The Private Armies of Latin America