Introduction

The Review is structured by reference to international regions and to business lines, allowing you to quickly find the topics most relevant to you. However, reading the Review as a whole allows common themes and cross jurisdiction/sector risks to be identified.

In the introduction to last year’s Review we identified AI, extreme weather events, global economic challenges and ESG as some of the areas of common focus. This year, common themes include: issues relating to the private credit (or “shadow banking”) market and concerns as to whether an economic downturn might have ripple effects across the wider banking sector; continuing growth in PFAS (perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances) related claims, which are now being compared to asbestosis claims; and, of course, the continued growth in use of AI, being both a claims risk and a considerable underwriting opportunity.

Yet the biggest issue we highlighted in last year’s Review was that physical and political conflict arising from state polarisation/isolationism and increasing geopolitical tensions seemed set to continue, if not intensify, in 2025. Sadly, that prediction has very much proved to be true.

The clearest thread running through this year’s articles is the underlying impact of increased state self-protectionism and rising geopolitical conflict. The level and duration of armed conflict worldwide remains worryingly high as measured against the previous few decades. Furthermore, assessing whether a given political dispute (whether inter or intra state) will develop into economic or armed conflict has become increasingly unpredictable. Even during the time it has taken to finalise this introduction, whilst the US continues to seek to broker peace in the now nearly 4-year-long war resulting from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it has itself just forcibly deposed and arrested the president of another state; a state which it says it now intends to run. The US has also seized a Russian flagged oil tanker in European waters, with UK assistance, and continues to press for the “acquisition of” Greenland – seemingly considering doing so by force.

The wildly unpredictable nature of so many of the world’s governments (including, and especially, those of the US, Russia and China), and their apparent willingness to flagrantly disregard rules of international law, means that, more than ever, it’s impossible to predict what the next 12 months will bring. Only one thing seems certain – we can no longer sensibly predict how states will manage their relationships with each other. This means there is likely to be yet more conflict and considerable volatility in both a geopolitical and economic sense. As a market we should be ready for the existing “rules” (of international law, of trade, of regulation, of… any kind) to change at the drop of a hat.

Strap in for 2026 – we look forward to joining you on the ride!