“Lebanon Debate” – Basma Atwi
On the cusp of political negotiations taking place between the United States of America and Iran to end a war that has stifled the world economically, there are conclusions that can be recorded on the sidelines of what is happening in the corridors of politics and the military fields, the first of which is that some countries are no longer satisfied with political neutrality, but rather have turned it into a source of profits by exploiting conflicts between major powers. Meaning that economic sanctions, trade wars, and geopolitical disputes did not stop global trade, but rather changed its paths. Instead of goods moving directly from one country to another, they pass through intermediary countries that generate large profits from trade, money, or technology in exchange for this role.
On the ground, there are many examples of transforming political neutrality into a major economic benefit. After the imposition of Western sanctions on Russian oil, India bought Russian oil at reduced prices, then refined it and re-exported oil derivatives to Europe at the world price, achieving large profits, while Europe obtained energy legally despite the sanctions. Because of the US tariffs on Chinese products, Chinese companies moved their factories to Mexico, where the products are manufactured and then exported to the United States in accordance with the free trade agreement, which allows them to avoid high customs duties. Cities such as Dubai and Singapore have become havens for capital seeking stability, attracting wealth and investments emerging from areas of tension, which has strengthened their real estate, banking, and wealth management sectors.
If the current war shows that economic power today does not depend only on production or military power, but on the ability to play the role of mediator between competing powers. Countries that can link rival markets achieve significant profits, while countries that remain a direct party to the conflicts lose.
Gansu: The cracks of the big boys turned into net profits for the “bridge countries”
The economic expert, Dr. Wajib Qanso, believes that “behind the curtain of the political and military contradiction taking place in the world, a parallel financial and logistical system was born, controlled by the “Geopolitical Swing States,” which transformed political neutrality into a paid commercial product, through a strategy that has become the undeclared engine of growth in the contemporary international economy, which is “Geopolitical Arbitrage.”
He explains to “Lebanon Debate” that “in financial literature, ‘arbitration’ simply means buying an asset from a market where its price is falling, and selling it immediately in another market where it is rising, to benefit from the price differences without bearing major risks. Today, the bridge countries have transferred this concept to international politics; they are no longer satisfied with the traditional position of negative neutrality, but rather have exploited the discord between the Western and Eastern camps to become the forced corridor, the back factory, and the shared financial and technical haven between the adversaries.”
He points out that “the geopolitical arbitration strategies are distributed today across four main paths, supported by stark numbers and facts from the scenes of international trade, the first of which is the arbitration of energy and commodities, represented by the “Indian washing machine” model. When the West imposed strict sanctions and price ceilings on Russian energy resources, the flow of oil did not stop, but rather the geometry of its paths changed only to generate exceptional profits for intermediaries, and India acquired a record share ranging between 40 to 45 percent of the total seaborne Russian crude oil exports (such as a mixture “Ural”, benefiting from huge geopolitical discounts amounting to $15-20 per barrel compared to global Brent prices, pointing out that “here the role of the huge Jamnagar refinery complex of the Indian company Reliance Industries is highlighted, where this cheap crude is refined and converted into diesel and jet fuel, to be legally re-exported to the heart of Europe at the full global price. The result? Securing European energy supplies, and continuing the flow of oil globally, but with a new legal identity.”
The second path, according to Qanso, is “arbitrating supply chains. Mexico has become Beijing’s back gate.” In light of the tightened customs restrictions and trade tensions between the United States and China, international companies found themselves forced to look for a “friendly” or geographically close option (nearshoring). Mexico has not only surpassed China as the largest trading partner of the United States, but Chinese direct investments directed toward Mexico have recorded historic leaps, especially in the electric car sector, their components, and battery technology,” he explained. Industrial complexes in the Mexican industrial state of Monterrey indicate that more than 40 percent of new foreign companies are companies with Chinese capital. Products are manufactured within Mexico, then shipped overland across the border to flow to American markets duty-free under the USMCA, thus becoming the smart logistical link that protects Chinese capital from the guillotine of American duties of 25 percent or more.
The third path, according to Qanso, is to “arbitrate sovereign havens, Dubai and Singapore as “safety funds”, because capital is inherently cowardly. With the increasing global freezing of sovereign assets, private and political wealth began to look for financial centers that do not adopt a pivot policy. The luxury real estate markets, banking services, wealth management, and family offices in Dubai and Singapore have witnessed unprecedented historical leaps,” noting that “these cities offer flexible legislation.” And strict political neutrality, as Dubai recorded record cash and real estate flows, and Singapore attracted hundreds of new Asian and Western family offices. These centers have become the preferred “financial outlet” for flows of money escaping the hell of geopolitical tensions and inflation, and seeking safety away from the traditional “SWIFT” system and the absolute control of the dollar.
He explains, “The fourth path is the arbitration of technology and computing. The circuitous chip channels, and with the intensification of the technical Cold War and Washington imposing strict restrictions on the export of advanced artificial intelligence chips to Beijing, a modern style of arbitration has emerged that bridges the digital divide. Technological bridge countries in Southeast Asia and the Middle East (such as Malaysia and Vietnam) have turned into back channels for assembling, testing, and redirecting advanced semiconductors,” stressing that “the matter is not limited to physical shipping, but extends to ‘cloud arbitration,’ where “Bridge countries host massive data centers equipped with the latest embargoed graphics processing chips (GPUs), renting their computing capabilities via the cloud to companies and developers from the sanctioned powers, disrupting the technological embargo and turning it into exceptional technical returns for intermediaries.”
The question arises here, where did this complex engineering of financial and logistical detour come from? Qanso answers, “It is not the result of coincidence, and here a decisive historical and economic fact emerges: the “Iranian catalog.” If Russia, China, and India today manage the geopolitical arbitration scene on a global level and with billions of dollars, then the long American-Iranian conflict was the first “experimental laboratory” in which these tools were born. Over the decades of the comprehensive embargo, it was Tehran that invented and engineered the creative mechanisms to circumvent sanctions through shadow fleets, the idea of cargo ships that Turning off tracking and communication devices at sea, changing their flags, and transferring oil from one ship to another to camouflage its source is an Iranian innovation par excellence,” he pointed out, noting that “today, this concept has expanded to turn into a giant parallel navigation sector that includes between 800 and 1,000 oil and shipping tankers, operating outside the Western insurance and banking system, and parallel financial networks to compensate for the deprivation of the SWIFT system, as Tehran has developed complex networks of Front companies and exchange offices to monetize trade funds.”
He stresses that “the historical irony is that what began as ‘defensive tricks’ invented by Iran to survive with its economy under siege, was adopted, expanded in scope, and huge liquidity was pumped into it by major giants such as Russia and China. The ‘Iranian catalog’ has transformed from a local maneuver into the infrastructure of a parallel global economic system that accommodates everyone who wants to escape Western financial hegemony.”
The Great Irony: The “Selective Blindness” of Great Powers
The inevitable economic question here is: Why do great powers like the United States or the European Union allow these obvious loopholes?
“The answer lies in pragmatism and the imperative of survival,” Qanso says. “Washington and Brussels are fully aware that complete and complete decoupling of global economies is a form of economic suicide; it would lead the world to hyperinflation and severe shortages of basic commodities, rare metals, and chips. Therefore, policymakers in the West are practicing what might be called ‘selective blindness.’ They need these ‘bridge states’ to act as safety valves to relieve pressure, allowing sanctions to appear strict and idealistic in political statements. While economically ensuring the continued rotation of global markets through safe back channels.
He concludes: “The standards of economic power have changed radically. In the last century, power was measured by the volume of mass production, or military dominance over trade lanes. Today, wealth goes to those who possess “flexibility and the ability to connect and adapt.” The winners in the new global economy are not those who have the greatest muscles in conflict, but rather those who are good at dancing on the ropes of balance, and are skilled at transforming geopolitical rifts into profitable production lines and net profit margins. This is the era of “merchants of new ties,” and whoever does not have the flexibility to become A bridge that will be swept away by conflicts and become merely a fault line.”
