Red Sea passage remains a no-go for shipping despite US action
The USS Dwight D. Eisenhower aircraft carrier in the Red Sea, during operations against the Houthi militia in Yemen, on Feb 21, 2024. PHOTO: KENNY HOLSTON/NYTIMES
The largest commercial shipping companies continue to avoid the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, despite a recent ceasefire agreement between the United States and Houthis intended to make the trade lanes safer.
The ceasefire, which began May 6, ended a US campaign that involved more than 1,100 strikes against the Houthis in Yemen and became a source of embarrassment for the Trump administration after group chats about the strikes inadvertently became public. The Pentagon had planned on a monthslong bombardment, but President Donald Trump ended it after about 50 days.
'If the intention was to restore freedom of navigation, which is what they stated it was, then the results speak for themselves: The shipping industry has not gone back,' said Mr Richard Meade, editor-in-chief of Lloyd's List, a shipping publication.
Ship traffic through the Red Sea is down by around three-fifths since 2023 when the Houthis started targeting ships there in solidarity with Hamas in its war with Israel in the Gaza Strip, Mr Meade said. Fearing that their vessels would be struck, big shipping companies avoided the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, taking a much longer route around the southern tip of Africa to travel between Asia and Europe.
The Houthis have said they are still at war with Israel and will attack vessels bound for the country. And though the Houthis have not attacked a commercial vessel since December, shipping companies say they worry that their vessels may be hit, deliberately or mistakenly, and have no plans to sail the southern part of the Red Sea anytime soon.
'We're pretty far from the threshold,' said Mr Vincent Clerc, the CEO of A.P. Moller-Maersk, a large shipping line based in Copenhagen, Denmark. Speaking soon after the ceasefire in May, he said the Red Sea would have to remain safe for the foreseeable future before the company's vessels returned.
Shipping executives said they also feared a severe disruption to their networks if they returned to the Red Sea but suddenly had to pull out of the region because attacks resumed.
When Mr Trump started the military engagement with the Houthis in March, he said their attacks on shipping had cost the global economy 'BILLIONS of dollars.' Commenting on the ceasefire, he said, 'They say they will not be blowing up ships anymore.'
Oman brokered the ceasefire between the Houthis and the United States. Describing the truce, Oman's foreign minister said that 'neither side will target the other, including American vessels, in the Red Sea and Bab al-Mandab Strait, ensuring freedom of navigation and the smooth flow of international commercial shipping.'
But maritime analysts said it was unclear whether the ceasefire applied just to American ships.
'Was this only an agreement between the Americans and the Houthis not to fire at each other's military capabilities, or was this something that did indeed also cover the merchant ships going through the area?' asked Mr Jakob Larsen, chief safety and security officer at BIMCO, a shipping trade group.
Nor did the ceasefire appear to involve the Houthis' conflict with Israel.
The Houthis expanded their attacks on Israel in May to include vessels at or on their way to Haifa, an Israeli port, noted Mr Jack Kennedy, head of country risk for the Middle East and North Africa at S&P Global Market Intelligence. And while the Houthis are unlikely to attack American vessels during their ceasefire, 'the unclear designations around a vessel or company's relationship to Israel and Israeli ports, and uncertainties around Houthi targeting accuracy, mean there is a severe risk to ships transiting the Red Sea,' Mr Kennedy said.
In an email to The New York Times, the Houthi-linked group that communicates with the shipping industry said that 'no guarantees can be provided to shipping companies.'
The group added: 'Sanctions and prohibitions are limited exclusively to companies and vessels affiliated with or linked to' Israel. The group also said the Yemeni armed forces' actions 'are carried out through a precise mechanism designed to prevent mistakes.'
The White House and the Pentagon did not comment.
Even though the route around Africa uses more fuel and crews are at sea for longer, shipping operations have adapted to the detour.
'If it were really a pain, if this new route was really imposing costs, I think you might see more countries willing to take the risk,' said Ms Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a research institute that favours restraint in foreign policy.
In fact, traveling longer distances has allowed the shipping lines to deploy the glut of new ships that they ordered during the pandemic trade boom. Before the Red Sea attacks, the supply of new vessels threatened to depress shipping rates and the earnings of shipping companies.
'Frankly, this disruption, this long way round, has allowed the industry to a certain extent to defy economic gravity,' Mr Meade said.
Still, one large shipping company, CMA CGM, based in Marseilles, France, has been sending a small number of vessels through the Red Sea. Ship tracking sites showed that, in recent weeks, at least five had been in the southern part of the Red Sea, near Yemen.
But CMA CGM said in a statement that it did 'not plan to resume transits through the Suez Canal on a large scale in the short term, unless security conditions allow it.'
The rerouting of vessels away from the Red Sea has deprived Egypt of billions of much-needed dollars in toll revenue from the Suez Canal. To coax shipping companies back, the canal is offering large vessels a 15 per cent discount to go through the canal. NYTIMES
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
34 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Latvian president believes NATO will overcome obstacles, meet 5% goal
RIGA - Latvia's president expressed confidence NATO would agree to a new higher defence spending target demanded by U.S. President Donald Trump, despite Spanish objections, saying the alliance had little choice given the growing threat from Russia. Spain on Thursday asked to opt out of the plan to increase members' defence spending to 5% of their gross domestic product, as requested by Trump, a move which could derail next week's NATO summit at the Hague. Any agreement to raise defence spending needs unanimous approval by the 32 member states. Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics told Reuters on Friday he understood why countries further from Russia might have difficulties convincing their voters to spend more on defence. But he said the need was pressing. 'I do hope there is the understanding in Madrid that this is a critical time for the Alliance, both when it comes to (increasing) its defence capabilities, but also to the Trans-Atlantic relationship,' he said in an interview in Riga. 'I think that they don't have much of a choice,' he added. At an estimated 1.28% of GDP, Spain had the lowest proportion of expenditure on defence in the alliance last year, according to NATO estimates. Latvia and fellow Baltic states Lithuania and Estonia are urgently ramping up their militaries, fearing that their neighbour and former overlord Russia could push on from its 2022 invasion of Ukraine to take more territory. They spent more than 3% of GDP on defence this year, and have committed to top 5% for the next few years. "We are saying that we need to spend as soon as possible now in order to avoid a worst-case scenario, spending much more later," Rinkevics said. "While Russia is stuck in Ukraine, that possibility of a direct military attack is not very high," he said. "But it may change very, very quickly ... if a development in Ukraine leads Russian leadership to believe that NATO is weak, that Ukraine is defeated, that NATO is divided". REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
US Supreme Court upholds law allowing Palestinian authorities to be sued over attacks
FILE PHOTO: The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen the morning before justices are expected to issue opinions in pending cases, in Washington, U.S., June 14, 2024. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz/File Photo WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court upheld on Friday a statute passed by Congress to facilitate lawsuits against Palestinian authorities by Americans killed or injured in attacks abroad as plaintiffs pursue monetary damages for violence years ago in Israel and the West Bank. The 9-0 ruling overturned a lower court's decision that the 2019 law, the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, violated the rights of the Palestinian Authority and Palestine Liberation Organization to due process under the U.S. Constitution. Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored the ruling, said the 2019 jurisdictional law comported with due process rights enshrined in the Constitution's Fifth Amendment. "It is permissible for the federal government to craft a narrow jurisdictional provision that ensures, as part of a broader foreign policy agenda, that Americans injured or killed by acts of terror have an adequate forum in which to vindicate their right" to compensation under a federal law known as the Antiterrorism Act of 1990, Roberts wrote. The U.S. government and a group of American victims and their families had appealed the lower court's decision that struck down a provision of the law. Among the plaintiffs are families who in 2015 won a $655 million judgment in a civil case alleging that the Palestinian organizations were responsible for a series of shootings and bombings around Jerusalem from 2002 to 2004. They also include relatives of Ari Fuld, a Jewish settler in the Israel-occupied West Bank who was fatally stabbed by a Palestinian in 2018. "The plaintiffs, U.S. families who had loved ones maimed or murdered in PLO-sponsored terror attacks, have been waiting for justice for many years," said Kent Yalowitz, a lawyer for the plaintiffs. "I am very hopeful that the case will soon be resolved without subjecting these families to further protracted and unnecessary litigation," Yalowitz added. The ongoing violence involving Israel and the Palestinians served as a backdrop to the case. U.S. courts for years have grappled over whether they have jurisdiction in cases involving the Palestinian Authority and PLO for actions taken abroad. Under the language at issue in the 2019 law, the PLO and Palestinian Authority automatically "consent" to jurisdiction if they conduct certain activities in the United States or make payments to people who attack Americans. Roberts in Friday's ruling wrote that Congress and the president enacted the jurisdictional law based on their "considered judgment to subject the PLO and PA (Palestinian Authority) to liability in U.S. courts as part of a comprehensive legal response to 'halt, deter and disrupt' acts of international terrorism that threaten the life and limb of American citizens." New York-based U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ruled in 2022 that the law violated the due process rights of the PLO and Palestinian Authority. The New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling. President Joe Biden's administration initiated the government's appeal, which subsequently was taken up by President Donald Trump's administration. The Supreme Court heard arguments in the case on April 1. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Straits Times
2 hours ago
- Straits Times
US sanctions target those providing Iran with defense machinery, Houthi oil trading
FILE PHOTO: A bronze seal for the Department of the Treasury is shown at the U.S. Treasury building in Washington, U.S., January 20, 2023. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/ File Photo WASHINGTON - The Trump administration said on Friday it had issued fresh Iran-related sanctions targeting eight entities, one vessel and one person for their alleged role in providing sensitive machinery for Tehran's defense industry. "The United States remains resolved to disrupt any effort by Iran to procure the sensitive, dual-use technology, components, and machinery that underpin the regime's ballistic missile, unmanned aerial vehicle, and asymmetric weapons programs," U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said. "Treasury will continue to degrade Iran's ability to produce and proliferate these deadly weapons, which threaten regional stability and global security," he added in a statement announcing the action. Two of the entities include shipping companies based in Hong Kong: Unico Shipping Co Ltd and Athena Shipping Co Ltd, the statement said. The Treasury Department on Friday also issued counterterrorism-related sanctions targeting Yemen's Iran-aligned Houthis over alleged illicit oil trading and shipping, it said in a separate statement. Those sanctions target four individuals, 12 entities, and two vessels over imported oil and other illicit goods to support the Houthis, the department said. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
