Blog

The global shipping industry is the backbone of world trade, transporting over 80% of goods internationally by volume and over 70% by value.

The security of merchant ships, sea lanes, choke points and maritime infrastructure (ports, energy pipelines, natural gas extraction platforms, LNG terminals, communications cables) has serious implications for the global economy.

Maritime transport and supply chains are easy to disrupt, and this vulnerability has become a "tool" in the geopolitical competition between the Great Powers (USA, China, Russia) and their allies.

The geopolitical instrumentalization of sea straits

A major vulnerability is the dependence of maritime transport on strategic straits that allow for shorter sea voyages, thereby reducing costs. It has been estimated that 70% of maritime trade passes through these critical straits. In some of these strategic straits, such as the Straits of Hormuz, the Straits of Malacca, the Suez Canal, and the Bab el-Mandab, the risk of disruption to maritime trade has increased dramatically.

For example, in the Persian Gulf region, Iran occasionally seizes tankers under various pretexts. It also threatens to close the Strait of Hormuz, through which 25%-30% of global energy trade passes, if attacked by the US or Israel, thus causing economic chaos.

The scale of the impact that closing a critical strategic strait can have was demonstrated in 2021, when the six-day blockade of the Suez Canal, due to the stranding of the Taiwanese container ship Ever Given, caused chaos in global supply chains. The incident highlighted the fragile nature of global supply flows and how easily maritime trade can be derailed. The daily cost of the Suez Canal congestion, which affected 400 commercial ships, reached an astronomical $9,6 billion.

Merchant ships as a strategic target

Merchant shipping has recently been the target of attacks by powerful states using a variety of advanced technological means against ships: ballistic missiles, unmanned vehicles, cyberattacks, satellite intelligence gathering, mines. For example, in the context of the war in Ukraine, both Russia and Ukraine deliberately attacked merchant ships and ports with the aim of disrupting maritime trade. Emphasis was placed on the strategic instrumentalization of the cargoes carried by these ships (grain, oil) with the aim of creating a food and energy crisis, which was achieved.

The same scenario was repeated in the Red Sea, through which 12% of maritime trade passes. There, the Houthis, allies of Iran, have attacked 15 merchant ships, mainly of Western interests, in the last 190 months (in retaliation for the Gaza war), resulting in a dramatic reduction in Red Sea transits by 60%-75%. This forced ships, especially the larger ones, to change course, thus causing serious problems in the supply chains. The alternative route – bypassing Africa – increased the duration and cost of the journey.

The operation to confront the Houthis in order to restore the security of maritime trade in the Red Sea has recently been undertaken by the United States, which is the only naval power that has the ability to do so. However, in the discussion that took place in Washington before the start of the military operation with the participation of those responsible for foreign policy issues, strong reservations were expressed about the feasibility of taking on the burden of such an operation, the result of which would "unravel" the Europeans.

The questioning of freedom of navigation

The South China Sea, through which 30%-40% of global maritime trade (about 5 trillion dollars) passes, is also a field of geopolitical confrontation. China claims almost 90% of the region with historical arguments and tries to impose its sovereignty with tools of "hybrid warfare" ("naval national guard" consisting of fishing fleets, coast guard).

What is at stake in this sea is freedom of navigation, as China interprets the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in a way that restricts the passage of foreign warships and potentially commercial ships. The US – and its allies – have reacted to China’s attempt to instrumentalize the Law of the Sea.

In response, the US, which does not accept Chinese control over such a crucial maritime trade route, regularly carries out military missions (Freedom of Navigation Operations) to effectively challenge Chinese claims of sovereignty. This often leads to dangerous naval confrontations. The South China Sea is thus a geopolitical minefield that threatens to detonate maritime trade and global supply chains in the event of escalation.

Trade war and the instrumentalization of supply chains

Geopolitical competition between the Great Powers is currently conducted primarily through economic means. The extensive use of economic warfare tools (see embargoes, sanctions, tariffs, port entry fees) increases the cost, complexity, volatility and risks of commercial shipping. The US has imposed primary and secondary sanctions on major energy producers such as Russia, Iran and Venezuela. This has caused a complete rearrangement of energy supply chains and has increased the risk of those involved in this trade.

Also, the recent decision of the Trump administration to impose tariffs on the main trading partners of the US has caused an extensive trade war that has disrupted global shipping flows with a direct impact on supply chains. Trade between the two largest economies in the world, the US and China, has practically been minimized today, due to excessive tariffs (145% and 125% respectively). The ultimate goal of the tariff war is to “unhook” Western economies from China. The US is promoting a rearrangement in production chains by transferring production within the US itself, transferring production to neighboring countries, such as Mexico, and transferring to friendly countries, such as India and Vietnam.

The combination of sanctions, high tariffs and restructuring of supply chains is leading to significant reshuffles in global maritime trade, changing commodity flows and shaping new balances in the international shipping market.

The shipbuilding industry as a "strategic weapon"

One form of protectionism affecting maritime transport has to do with the shipbuilding industry. The US has essentially abandoned the shipbuilding sector, which is now dominated by China with a market share of over 50%. For strategic reasons, Washington has now chosen to strengthen this industry. Without a shipbuilding industry, the US will not be able to maintain its dominance of the seas. At the same time, the new US administration wants to prevent the further strengthening of the Chinese shipbuilding industry, because the increase in the power of the Chinese navy is inextricably linked to the rapid development of Chinese shipyards.

In order to implement this strategy, the US has announced the imposition of high “entry fees” in US ports on ships built in China. Such regulations, which are scheduled to come into effect next October, are expected to cause further rearrangement in maritime transport (mainly in container ships and tankers), since the “pool” of ships that can be chartered to the US will be practically limited. This will affect the availability of ships, their rates and values, and will increase the costs and complexity of maritime transport.

In conclusion, geopolitical confrontation affects the shipping industry in many ways. The obstruction of maritime trade creates the conditions for the strengthening of alternative land-based trade corridors such as the Chinese “Silk Road” (BRI). However, the rearrangement of supply chains creates not only risks but also opportunities for the shipping ecosystem. For example, the rearrangement of energy markets due to the war in Ukraine favored maritime energy trade, while the obstruction of trade in the Red Sea led to a significant increase in freight rates, mainly for container ships.

"TO VIMA" newspaper of May 25, 2025, p. 48

Mr. Athanasios Platias is Professor Emeritus of Strategy at the University of Piraeus and President of the Council on International Relations, a member of ELISME.