Why the Arctic route could leave the Suez in the cold — Ahmad Ibrahim

JUNE 25 — For centuries, global trade has followed a simple logic: take the shortest path over water. That’s why the Suez Canal and the Strait of Malacca became the world’s busiest shipping chokepoints. Goods from China flow west through Malacca, into the Indian Ocean, up through the Suez, and on to Europe. It works. But it’s not the only way anymore.  

Recent trouble in the Strait of Hormuz—where tensions have threatened oil shipments—has reminded everyone how fragile these chokepoints are. One closure, one conflict, and supply chains shudder. That’s why China is pushing its Belt and Road land routes, reviving the old Silk Road by rail. Trains now carry everything from electronics to refrigerated meat from Xi’an to Duisburg in under 20 days. It’s slower than ships? No—it’s actually faster than the 30–40 days by sea. In fact it has been reported that as a result of the blockade at the Hormuz Strait, Iran is moving its oil cargo by train to China, its biggest buyer. 

But there’s a wildcard barely discussed: the Arctic. As the planet warms, sea ice in the far north is melting. The Northern Sea Route along Russia’s Arctic coast is already open for longer each summer. Within a decade or two, if the planet continues to heat up, it could be a reliable shipping lane for much of the year. And that changes everything. As global warming continues to bite, that reality is not to be dismissed. 

Imagine a container ship leaving Shanghai, heading north past Japan, skirting Russia’s top, and arriving in Rotterdam. Distance from Shanghai to Hamburg via Suez: about 11,000 nautical miles. Via the Arctic: roughly 8,000. That’s a 30 per cent shorter trip—less fuel, less time, lower costs. And less choke points. 

So what happens to the old routes? First, the Suez Canal loses its monopoly on Asia–Europe trade. Egypt earned close to $10 billion in canal tolls last year. That money could shrink. Ports like Singapore, which thrive on Malacca Strait traffic, might see fewer ships stopping for fuel and repairs. Malaysian ports are also not spared. 

Second, countries that built their economies around warm-water ports—Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt—will need to adapt. Meanwhile, Russia stands to gain massively, controlling most of the Arctic route. China, already investing in icebreakers and Arctic infrastructure, would have a direct, politically safer path to Europe—bypassing the US-patrolled South China Sea and the pirate-prone Gulf of Aden.  

But here’s the catch: the Arctic isn’t ready. No deep ports, few rescue services, harsh weather even in summer, and ice-strengthened ships cost more. Plus environmental risks—a single spill in fragile Arctic waters would be a disaster. And ironically, the same climate change opening the route is the very thing we’re trying to slow. Still, the direction is clear. Trade follows efficiency. When the Arctic becomes passable year-round—likely by 2040 or sooner—the Suez and Malacca won’t disappear overnight. But they will feel the chill. For ordinary people, this means cheaper goods and faster deliveries. For nations, a geopolitical shake-up. For the planet, a bittersweet irony: a melting ice cap creating a profitable shortcut, while reminding us why it’s melting in the first place. The world’s trade routes are changing. The climate change phenomenon is one factor driving the shifts. Not with a bang, but with the slow, steady crack of Arctic ice. And the smart money is already buying warmer coats.

As a country which has for years derived economic benefits from the current trade routes, Malaysia will also have to strategise to make up for the potential loss. We need to start investing in new trading partners. With the opening of the Arctic route, there will still be countries which would still remain committed to the current route. The Arctic route will cost them more. These are countries in the Southern Hemisphere, Africa, Middle East and South Asia. These are therefore the countries which we should give more attention building trade. Africa is especially strategic for the future of our international trade.  

* Professor Datuk Dr Ahmad Ibrahim  is affiliated with the Tan Sri Omar Centre for STI Policy Studies at UCSI University and is an Adjunct Professor at the Ungku Aziz Centre for Development Studies, Universiti Malaya. He can be reached at ahmadibrahim@ucsiuniversity.edu.my.  

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.