Stephen Rudman, Aon’s Head of Marine and Regional Aviation Lead for Asia, has suggested the situation in the Middle East underscores the growing interdependence of geopolitical risk, operational resilience and insurance within the aviation sector.
In a statement discussing the impact of ongoing Middle East tensions, Rudman noted that the situation is creating a complex risk landscape for airlines across Asia, with the most immediate operational impact being on routing.
“We have seen parts of Gulf and wider Middle East airspace restricted or subject to elevated risk, and therefore airlines are detouring around affected flight information regions,” the executive explained.
He continued, “That often means longer flight times, higher fuel burn and, in some cases, payload restrictions on long‑haul routes. Over time, this raises operating costs and can reduce aircraft and crew productivity, especially on Europe–Asia and Africa–Asia sectors that would normally use more direct corridors.
“Airlines are responding with much more sophisticated use of data and digital tools. Modern flight‑planning systems ingest real‑time NOTAMs, airspace restrictions, weather and security advisories, and then dynamically optimise routes to balance safety, time, fuel and overflight fees.
“In their operations control centres, carriers are running integrated ‘control tower’ dashboards that show live fleet positions, crew status and airport constraints, which allows them to manage reroutes and delays in a more coordinated way.
“Many are also investing in dedicated geopolitical risk monitoring, so they can adjust routes or suspend services quickly as the situation changes.”
Looking ahead, Rudman stated that airlines are set to begin treating geopolitical disruption as a structural feature of the operating environment rather than a one‑off event.
“That is driving more formal governance around overflight and destination risk, clearer internal policies on where they will and will not operate, and contingency planning for sudden airspace closures. Fleet and network flexibility are becoming more important, so carriers can reallocate capacity or reshape schedules if key corridors become unavailable,” Rudman added.
Elsewhere, he noted that there is scope for insurance to form part of the solution, rather than remaining simply a cost line.
Insurers and brokers are reportedly working more closely with airlines to structure programmes that recognise robust risk controls, such as documented routing policies, strong security oversight, and the use of advanced planning tools.
According to Rudman, there is also growing interest in more tailored solutions in certain cases, including the use of captives and, selectively, parametric structures to help address the financial impact of sudden airspace closures or route suspensions.
Rudman concluded, “Overall, the Middle East situation underlines how closely geopolitical risk, operational resilience and insurance are now intertwined for the aviation sector.
“Singapore, as a key aviation and insurance hub for the region, is at the centre of that conversation.
“For Singapore’s aviation insurance market, the impact is felt mainly through war‑risk and political violence covers rather than standard hull and liability alone.
“Underwriters are paying close attention to an airline’s exposure to higher‑risk regions – whether through direct services or regular overflights – and to the quality of its risk management.
“In general, we have seen upward pressure on war‑risk premiums and a more granular, route‑by‑route assessment of exposure, including sub‑limits or tighter terms for operations closer to conflict zones.”
