Estimated reading time: 5 minutes
By: Peter Bouwhuis
There was a time when we talked about disruption as if it were a storm passing over the house. Close the windows, wait it out, clean up afterward, and move on. That thinking no longer works. In 2026, disruption is not the storm anymore. It is the weather.
That may sound dramatic, but look around. Ports, routes, tariffs, fuel prices, labor shortages, weather, sanctions, technology rules, and geopolitics are all pushing and pulling at the same time. One week it is a chokepoint. The next week it is a shortage in one country. Then it is a customs issue, a cyber risk, or a sudden policy change.
And still, many companies talk about supply chains as if they are neat lines on a map.
They are not.
A supply chain is more like a living body. If one vein gets blocked, the pain may show up somewhere completely different. A delay at a port can become an empty shelf. A drought can become a higher food bill. A tariff can become a factory pause. A fuel spike can become a political problem.
That is why I agree strongly with Robert de Souza when he points to transit risk as one of the blind spots. We often talk about where goods are made and where they are sold. But what about everything in between? The ports. The canals. The straits. The trucks. The rail links. The customs desks. The operators. The lead times.
That middle part is where many problems hide.
I have seen this too often. A shipment looks fine on paper. The cargo is ready. The buyer is waiting. The route seems normal. Then one small link starts to crack. Suddenly everyone is calling, emailing, blaming, explaining, and asking the same painful question: why did nobody see this coming?
The honest answer is simple. Because nobody looked deep enough.
We cannot keep managing supply chains only by price and speed. That is like buying the cheapest umbrella and then acting surprised when it turns inside out in the wind. Lowest cost is nice until the first real shock arrives. Then everyone remembers the value of backup plans.
This is where resilience becomes more than a nice boardroom word. It means knowing your weak points before they become public problems. It means testing routes before they fail. It means understanding which supplier, port, border, or carrier can quietly become the reason your customer is angry.
Food supply chains show this very clearly. Food does not wait politely in a container. It spoils. It reacts to heat, fuel costs, fertilizer prices, port delays, and political decisions. One harvest problem can move through a region like a row of falling chairs. By the time the consumer sees the price increase, the real problem may have started weeks earlier.
That is the part many people miss. Every shock hits twice. First comes the visible shock. Then comes the delayed shock.
The first one makes headlines. The second one hurts operations.
A blocked route today can mean missing stock next month. A port delay today can mean production trouble later. A sudden trade rule today can mean a broken contract tomorrow. This is why old reporting tools are no longer enough. By the time the dashboard turns red, the problem may already be inside the system.
So yes, we need better control towers, better data visibility, and better scenario planning. But let us not make this too fancy. The goal is not to admire technology. The goal is to ask better questions.
What happens if this port stops working?
What happens if this carrier has no capacity?
What happens if this country changes export rules?
What happens if this route becomes too risky?
What happens if the second shock is worse than the first?
These are not negative questions. They are responsible questions.
The same applies to US trade policy, China, and the wider reshaping of global trade. Companies are no longer dealing only with commercial decisions. They are dealing with political decisions that can change the route, the cost, and even the legality of a shipment. That is uncomfortable, but it is reality.
Trade is becoming more regional. Sourcing is becoming more political. Logistics is becoming more strategic. The old idea that goods simply move from A to B is finished.
Look at Asia Pacific. Look at semiconductors. Look at textiles. Look at food. Look at energy. The pattern is the same, even if the cargo is different. Risk is no longer sitting at the edge of the supply chain. It is sitting in the middle of it.
And here is my concern. Some companies still treat resilience as an expense. I see it differently. Poor preparation is the real expense. The invoice just arrives later.
We should stop asking whether disruption will happen. Of course it will. The better question is this: when it happens, will we be surprised again?
Because surprise is not a strategy.
The winners in this new environment will not be the companies that pretend everything is under control. They will be the ones honest enough to admit where they are vulnerable. They will map their routes, test their assumptions, talk to their logistics partners, and build options before the panic starts.
That may not sound glamorous. But neither is explaining to a customer why their cargo is stuck, their factory is waiting, or their shelves are empty.
Supply chains are no longer breaking once in a while. They are being tested every day.
The real question is whether we are testing them first.
