Translation. Region: Russian Federation –
Source: People's Republic of China in Russian – People's Republic of China in Russian –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
Source: People's Republic of China – State Council News
Hostilities between the US, Israel, and Iran have been ongoing for over two weeks. Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a key global shipping corridor, has been severely disrupted, triggering a chain reaction, including a sharp rise in global shipping costs and a restructuring of supply chains. Analysts warn that if passage through the Strait of Hormuz continues to be paralyzed, the global logistics system will face the most devastating challenges since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The "blockade of arteries" has led to chaos in shipping.
The Strait of Hormuz plays a vital role in the global supply and transportation of oil and liquefied natural gas and is the artery of the global shipping system. According to the US Energy Information Administration, in 2025, the average daily volume of oil and petroleum products transported through the Strait of Hormuz will be approximately 20 million barrels, and the annual energy trade volume will be nearly $600 billion. Since the beginning of US and Israeli military strikes on Iran, the security of this strategic passage has fallen to its lowest point.
Due to the de facto blockade caused by the fighting, shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has dropped sharply, with many merchant vessels forced to stop at the outer approaches or reroute. British news agency Lloyd's List Intelligence reports that only 77 ships transited the Strait of Hormuz from March 1 to 13. By comparison, 1,229 ships transited the strait from March 1 to 11, 2025.
The world's largest shipping companies are taking risk mitigation measures one after another. Danish shipping company Maersk, Swiss shipping company MSC, French group CMA CGM, German shipping company Hapag-Lloyd, and others recently announced the suspension or termination of routes through the Strait of Hormuz, ordering their vessels to navigate to designated safe zones or take routes around the Cape of Good Hope.
Recently, a fire broke out at the once-bustling port of Jebel Ali in Dubai due to debris from a mid-air missile interception, temporarily suspending operations. Analysts at the British magazine The Economist believe the damage from this "soft closure" is almost equal to a formal blockade, and most operators are no longer able to maintain normal commercial shipping.
Multiple surcharges have led to increased logistics costs
The protracted conflict is gradually increasing global shipping costs in three ways: freight costs, insurance premiums, and fuel prices.
Due to rerouting to avoid the conflict zone and reduced shipping capacity, freight rates on global shipping lines have risen significantly. Bypassing the Cape of Good Hope adds approximately 3,500–4,000 nautical miles to the route and 10–14 days to the journey time. The rental price of a 20-foot standard container has increased by approximately $200, representing a 15–20% increase in freight costs. CMA CGM has already begun charging an "extraordinary conflict surcharge" of $2,000 to $4,000 per container, while Hapag-Lloyd's "war risk surcharge" also reaches $1,500 per standard container.
The insurance market's reaction was particularly acute. As the conflict escalated, marine insurance rates for war risks rose sharply. Analysts at the American investment firm Jefferies note that, since most tankers are valued between $200 and $300 million, the new premium rate of 3% translates into a war risk premium of approximately $7.5 million for a vessel, compared to just 0.25% before the conflict. Beginning on March 5, several marine insurers cancelled their standard war risk insurance for routes in the Persian Gulf. Shipowners wishing to continue shipping are forced to pay extremely high premiums, with some rates soaring to 10% of the vessel's value. It is estimated that a single insurance premium for a very large tanker valued at $138 million transiting the strait could reach $14 million.
The sharp rise in bunker fuel prices also directly increases operating costs. Amid volatile global crude oil prices, marine fuel prices have risen significantly in major global shipping hubs. Maersk CEO Vincent Clerc warns, "These price increases will be passed on to our customers, to consumers."
The global supply chain network is under pressure and is adjusting
The forced restructuring of shipping has profound knock-on effects, forcing global supply chains to adjust accordingly.
The risk of disruption to supply chains for key raw materials is becoming increasingly apparent. The Middle East is not only an energy hub but also a major exporter of industrial raw materials such as aluminum and fertilizers. Currently, approximately one-third of the world's urea is transported through the Strait of Hormuz, and nearly half of the world's sulfur supplies also come from the Persian Gulf. The disruption of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz has already led to global supply chains in the agricultural and chemical industries facing the risk of disruption.
The precision manufacturing sector has also suffered severe damage. Analysts believe that, with inventory levels insufficient to handle an additional two weeks of round-trip delays, auto assembly plants in Germany, the US, and other countries are expected to feel the impact of delays in component deliveries from Asia for two to three weeks.
Disruptions to sea routes are forcing carriers to redirect some high-value or time-sensitive cargo to airfreight. Airfreight prices from South Asia to Europe have risen by approximately 70%. This "cost shifting" is rapidly reducing the profitability of supply chains.
The UN Conference on Trade and Development recently warned that disruptions to traffic through the Strait of Hormuz highlight the sensitivity of critical maritime energy routes to geopolitical tensions, causing serious disruption to global supply chains and commodity markets.
Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source. It represents an accurate account of the source's assertions and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
