China Opens Arctic Route Amid Iran War... Will It Dethrone Indian Ocean Shipping? [Current Affairs Show]

Voyage Time Halved Compared to Indian Ocean Route

US, China, and Russia Enter Full-Scale Struggle for Dominance over Arctic Shipping Corridor

■ Broadcast: The Asia Business Daily's 'So Jongsup's Current Affairs Show'

■ Host: So Jongsup, Political Specialist

■ Director: PD Lee Miri

■ Guest: Reporter Lee Hyunwoo

Since August 10, Chinese shipping companies have launched regular shipping routes to the UK via the Arctic Sea Route, marking the beginning of full-scale trade with Europe. With this new route traversing the Arctic Ocean now open, as opposed to the traditional path through the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, and the Suez Canal, China has secured an entirely new maritime transportation corridor that completely bypasses the Strait of Hormuz, which has suffered paralyzing disruptions in shipping due to the Iran War. In particular, as global warming has intensified, the period available for navigation on the Arctic Route has extended to more than 10 months a year. This has led to projections that the Arctic Route could soon replace the existing Indian Ocean route, raising concerns that the United States—long dominant in the Indian Ocean for decades—may see its strategic position challenged.

China-UK Regular Route Opens... Voyage Time Halved

AP Yonhap News

The traditional Indian Ocean route, which departs from southern China and passes through the Indian Ocean, the Middle East, and the Suez Canal before entering the Mediterranean, typically took about 40 days for an average cargo vessel. In contrast, using the Arctic Route reduces the voyage period dramatically to 20 days—about half the time.

Of course, since the ice has not completely melted and the route infrastructure remains underdeveloped, the operation of ultra-large cargo ships remains limited, meaning shipping is currently handled primarily by small to medium-sized vessels. Nonetheless, the economic benefit from the shorter distance is overwhelming. The first regular vessel deployed by Chinese shipping company Sea Legend on the maiden service between Ningbo, China, and Felixstowe, UK, was primarily loaded with China’s major exports to Europe, such as electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and solar panels.

The Arctic Route had remained closed for over 200 years due to the expansion of glacial ice during the Little Ice Age in the 18th century. Recently, with the rapid escalation of global warming in the 2020s, the period for which navigation is possible—once limited to just two summer months—has expanded to over 10 months, leading to the establishment of the first regular route in history. Currently, with the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait restricted due to blockades by Iran and Yemen’s Houthi rebels, the Arctic Sea Route, which traverses Russian territorial waters and presents far less geopolitical risk, is gaining attention as an alternative route. The scale of its operations is expected to further expand in the future.

US Sanctions on Russia: Difficult Entry Despite Shorter Voyage Time

AP Yonhap News

Despite the clear merits in terms of distance, major global shipping companies outside of China and Russia are still hesitant to use the Arctic Route. The most significant barrier is the United States' sanctions against Russia.

As most of the Arctic Route lies within Russian territorial waters, ships require approval from Russian authorities, as well as payment to Russia for ice location information, emergency rescue insurance, and various other service fees. However, as Western sanctions against Russia remain in force, making such payments could expose companies to “secondary boycott” (third-party sanction) risks. This is why major global shippers are reluctant to enter the Arctic Route.

Additional obstacles include a lack of intermediate stops and supply facilities, operating restrictions on very large ships, and high vessel insurance premiums—meaning both physical and financial limitations present additional challenges. As a result, unless the war in Ukraine ends and sanctions against Russia are eased, the comprehensive international activation of the Arctic Route will inevitably be limited.

Experts are divided on whether the US would use the Arctic Route if anti-Russian sanctions are lifted after the end of the Ukraine war. With the current Trump Administration seeking improved relations with Russia, and considering that the US and Russia have recently even discussed building a bridge connecting the Bering Sea, some speculate that the US would actively consider using the Arctic Route if sanctions are lifted.

However, if the war drags on or there is a change of administration, the situation could change. Traditionally, the US government has viewed Russia’s Arctic Route development as not merely an economic activity, but a military threat. In fact, in addition to developing major ports along the route, Russia has concentrated missile bases within the Arctic region, targeting Alaska, Canada, and the US mainland.

Korea Confronted with North Korean Risk...Pioneering the Arctic Route Is Not Easy

Yonhap News Agency

The activation of the Arctic Route would diminish the influence of the Indian Ocean routes, where the United States currently holds hegemonic power. Additionally, if conflict with China or Russia were to arise in the future, as in the case of the Strait of Hormuz, there is a risk that both countries could control passage along the Arctic Route. For this reason, many analysts believe that the US will not easily approve or directly utilize the activation of this route.

Pioneering the Arctic Route could also represent a pivotal change for the Korean economy. The Korean government, too, is planning trial operations within this month, aiming to establish regular shipping by 2030. If the route is established as a permanent option, it would provide a reliable alternative to respond to instability in the Middle East, with immense expected economic benefits such as reduced logistics costs.

However, major Asian allies of the US such as Korea and Japan are constrained by the diplomatic frameworks of US-China and US-Russia relations as well as sanctions against Russia. Compared to China, which has conducted pilot voyages and research since 2014, Korea has only just entered the phase of trial operations, and building a regular route will likely take considerable time.

An even greater variable is the North Korean risk. To access the Arctic Route, Korean ships must pass through the East Coast region, where North Korea's surprise missile provocations continue. If the safety of the East Sea route cannot be guaranteed, detouring around Japan increases travel distance and severely undermines economic viability. It cannot be ruled out that North Korea, like Iran, might threaten vessels passing through the East Sea or demand transit fees as well.

Ultimately, Korea must resolve a complex diplomatic equation involving US-China, US-Russia, and North Korea-US relations. Until the safety and geopolitical risks of the route are clearly addressed, experts believe Korea will face considerable pain before it can fully utilize the Arctic Route.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.