InvisibleChemicalValueStack™
Dr. Anju Sharma MrsSustainability
The chemical industry is becoming one of the least visible transmission mechanisms of global conflict.
In 2025, armed conflict was active in 49 states, while the number of interstate conflicts doubled from three to six. Global military expenditure reached US$2.89 trillion. Yet the economic impact of these conflicts is increasingly transmitted far beyond defence budgets through energy, shipping, trade restrictions, industrial policy and access to strategic materials.
Chemicals sit unusually close to the centre of that transmission.
The 2026 Middle East conflict demonstrated the mechanism. The de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz disrupted flows equivalent to almost 20% of global LNG supply, driving gas prices sharply higher in Europe and Asia. For chemicals, that is not merely an energy shock. Natural gas is simultaneously fuel, feedstock and cost base for ammonia, methanol, hydrogen and large parts of petrochemicals.
That’s the InvisibleChemicalValueStack™:
Resources → Energy → Chemical Intermediates → Strategic Molecules → Functional Materials → Industrial Systems
The geopolitical vulnerability often increases as the volume falls.
China accounts for roughly 46% of global chemical sales, but concentration can become considerably higher at individual molecular nodes. China, for example, represents an estimated 85–90% of LiPF₆ production, a critical electrolyte salt for lithium-ion batteries.
Meanwhile, Europe has announced around 37 million tonnes of chemical capacity closures since 2022 about 9% of its production capacity. Losing a cracker, chlor-alkali unit or intermediate plant matters beyond the tonnes removed: downstream specialty chemicals can remain European while their molecular foundations progressively migrate elsewhere.
This changes the meaning of geopolitical risk. The WTO’s 2026 analysis captures the broader direction: geopolitical tensions are pushing governments to reduce import dependence, restrict technology and investment flows and reconsider the risks of economic interdependence. Its modelling suggests a fully geo-fragmented world could reduce global exports by 18.6%.
For chemical risk management, therefore, country risk is no longer enough.
Boards need to know:
Who controls the feedstock?
Who converts it?
Where is the critical intermediate made?
Who owns the process know-how?
How many suppliers ultimately converge on the same molecule?
And how long would it take to recreate that chemistry elsewhere?
Because modern conflict does not have to reach the factory gate physically.
It can reach it molecule by molecule.
> “A company can have three suppliers—and still be single-sourced.
Dr. Anju Sharma | KtalystKlues™
The next geopolitical fault line may not be visible on a map. It may be buried several reactions upstream in the Invisible Chemical Value Stack™.
Originally published on LinkedIn on 2026-09-18 09:15:40: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Ashare%3A7506642087388565504
