The Daily View: New age of sea power

THE fact that governments are currently accusing each other of undermining the basic principle of freedom of navigation is arguably good news.

This cornerstone of international law, guaranteeing ships of all nations can sail, trade, and operate freely on the high seas and through international straits, as enshrined in UNCLOS, is under threat.

But if governments are still pointing fingers, then there is, at least, a legal principle still in play to defend.

The immediate geopolitical and security threats to maritime trade are self-evident right now from the Strait of Hormuz to the Baltic, to the South China Sea. But the long-term consequences of eroding the rights of innocent passage carry a potentially bigger risk to the global economy.

Russia’s actions have arguably contributed to that erosion more than most. That does not mean they are wrong though when they warn the erosion of the fundamental norms of international law of the sea has the potential to trigger a domino effect and undermine the global maritime trade system.

Despite growing protectionism and trade increasingly being directed down geopolitical lines, maritime trade remains the only viable conduit for the world economy as we know it.

Freedom of navigation still matters, but it is now seen as a diplomatic bargaining chip and its limits are being stress tested with increasing frequency and force.

China, Russia, the US and the EU have all separately raised concerns at the IMO, but also at the UN Security Council, and they all agree that global maritime security is being dangerously and routinely undermined.

But they have all pointed the finger of blame at each other as the source of the problem.

The accusations of piracy and unlawful interference with freedom of navigation have been coming thick and fast for a while now, but tactics that generate accusations of piracy one day can’t simply be rebranded as “law enforcement” or “counter-narcoterrorism” the next.

For shipowners, insurers and operators, the precedent matters more than the politics.

If freedom of navigation is conditional on who is doing the boarding rather than how it is done, then the rules-based maritime order is becoming increasingly selective — and far less predictable.

If state and non-state actors can divert or restrict global trade at sea, then trade must be considered in terms of national security and new structures put in place.

This new age of sea power means diplomacy will increasingly have to focus on ports, maritime alliances and trade routes.

Disruptions to maritime trade in the Black Sea, Red Sea, South China Sea and now the Strait of Hormuz all point to much larger questions about the future of maritime trade and freedom of navigation that have no clear answers yet.

Richard Meade
Editor-in-chief, Lloyd’s List

Click here to view the latest Lloyd’s List Daily Briefing