Diplomatic Analysis: Geopolitical restrictions are cumulatively eroding the civilian aviation ecosystem upon which U.S. strategic mobility critically depends.
Overview
The ability of the United States to rapidly project military power across Eurasia is increasingly jeopardised not by direct confrontation, but by the progressive closure of vital airspace and the growing ‘geopolitization’ of civilian aviation. What was once a relatively predictable network offering multiple routes is becoming constricted, asymmetric in access, and subject to escalating political conditions. The wars in Ukraine and Iran, alongside wider geopolitical tensions, are not simply causing temporary disruptions; they are fundamentally reshaping the landscape of Eurasian air mobility, forcing a re-evaluation of U.S. strategic planning and potentially requiring significant investment in resilience. This analysis examines the factors contributing to this trend, the key actors involved, and the implications for U.S. military capabilities, drawing on recent developments and expert commentary.
Historical Context
For decades, the U.S. military has leveraged the global civilian aviation ecosystem for strategic mobility. This reliance has been a cornerstone of its ability to respond to crises worldwide, offering a cost-effective and flexible alternative to solely relying on dedicated military transport assets. The post-Cold War era saw increasing integration, exemplified by the ‘Northern Distribution Network’ used to support operations in Afghanistan, which crucially relied on Russian airspace and infrastructure, including airlines like Volga-Dnepr. This demonstrated a degree of interdependence, where access to Russian geography and assets significantly reduced reliance on more challenging routes via Pakistan. The 9/11 attacks and the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the system’s capacity to adapt to shocks, but these were largely symmetric and temporary. Current disruptions, however, are fundamentally different; they are asymmetric – favouring some airlines (like those from China) over others – persistent, and cumulative, meaning that losing one route exacerbates the strain on remaining options.
Key Actors & Positions
Several key actors are shaping the current situation. Russia has effectively closed its airspace to many Western carriers following the invasion of Ukraine, and increasingly encourages airlines to avoid Ukrainian airspace due to drone operations. Ukraine, as a direct party to the conflict, is actively seeking to limit civilian overflights of Russian territory. China has maintained access to Russian airspace, gaining a commercial advantage and expanding its influence in Eurasian air transport. The United States is critically reliant on this network for military mobility and is increasingly concerned about its diminishing accessibility and resilience. European nations are caught in the middle, striving to balance continued connectivity with security concerns, while also seeking to bolster their own strategic mobility capabilities. Commercial airlines are attempting to navigate these geopolitical challenges, seeking alternative routes and adapting their operations, but their flexibility is constrained by rising costs and logistical complexities. Finally, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) faces a challenge in maintaining aviation safety and standards in a context of increasing geopolitical contestation.
Analysis
The progressive erosion of access to Eurasian airspace presents a multifaceted challenge. The concentration of air traffic onto fewer routes—particularly those traversing the Caucasus and the Gulf—increases vulnerability to disruption. The Iran conflict dramatically illustrated this, causing significant rerouting and delays, and highlighting the fragility of these alternative corridors. Beyond airspace closures, the deliberate targeting of aviation infrastructure – suspected sabotage and GPS jamming in Europe – adds another layer of risk. Moreover, aircraft themselves are becoming ‘geopolitical assets’, as demonstrated by the grounding of AirBridgeCargo’s fleet and the complex legal battles surrounding their ownership. The situation is not symmetrical; while Western carriers face restrictions, Chinese airlines benefit, potentially shifting the balance of power within the industry.
The U.S. military’s reliance on the Civil Reserve Air Fleet (CRAF) – a program leveraging commercial aircraft for military use – is also under strain. While the CRAF provides valuable surge capacity, it cannot manufacture overflight rights or guarantee access to politically sensitive airports. The U.S. Transportation Command recognizes the evolving threat – “fighting to move, instead of moving to fight” – but maintaining the required airlift capacity is becoming more difficult, with the organic fleet size falling slightly below established requirements. The interconnectedness of the commercial aviation system means that even seemingly unrelated commercial partnerships (like those between U.S. airlines and Chinese carriers) can raise strategic concerns. The long-term effect is a compression of mobility options and an increase in the cost – both financial and operational – of projecting military force.
Outlook
The trend towards a more constrained and politically contested Eurasian air mobility landscape is likely to continue. While a complete closure of all major air corridors is unlikely, further disruptions are inevitable due to ongoing conflicts and escalating geopolitical tensions. The U.S. will need to proactively address this challenge by investing in network resilience, diversifying transport options, and strengthening relationships with key partners who can provide access to alternative routes. This will require a more holistic approach, considering not only aircraft numbers but also the entire ecosystem – including airports, fuel supplies, maintenance facilities, and political access. Short-term solutions, such as relying heavily on the CRAF, will be insufficient. A more strategic, long-term investment in building redundancy and mitigating risk is essential to maintain U.S. military mobility in an increasingly complex and contested world.
Source References:
Kolbin, A. (2026, October 2). How Closed Airspace Threatens U.S. Military Mobility Across Eurasia. War on the Rocks. [https://warontherocks.com/2026/10/how-closed-airspace-threatens-u-s-military-mobility-across-eurasia/](https://warontherocks.com/2026/10/how-closed-airspace-threatens-u-s-military-mobility-across-eurasia/)
