FMC Launches Inquiry to Seven High-Risk Maritime Routes
Subscribe to our free newsletter today to keep up-to-date with the latest supply chain news.
When the Federal Maritime Commission launched an inquiry into seven global maritime chokepoints, it signaled a shift from reactive policymaking to strategic foresight. These routes—vital corridors of global trade—have long been prone to congestion, regulatory friction, and geopolitical disruption. The FMC’s investigation, announced in March 2025, aims to determine whether foreign policies or carrier practices are contributing to strain on the international shipping system.
The seven chokepoints handle a large share of global maritime cargo. Delays at any of these locations ripple through supply chains, disrupting logistics far beyond the water. FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei framed the inquiry as a way to ensure transparency and address practices that could disadvantage U.S. shippers.
This comes amid years of logistics turbulence, from pandemic-era port backups to war-related detours. The FMC’s latest move reflects a preemptive strategy to strengthen U.S. access to international markets.
Seven strategic chokepoints and the pressures they face
Each of the chokepoints under review serves as a critical passage in the flow of global goods. All face growing pressure from infrastructure constraints, vessel congestion, and external risks.
- Panama Canal
Despite a 2016 expansion, the canal struggles with reduced water levels, limiting vessel transits. Recent droughts have forced officials to cap daily crossings, delaying eastbound shipments from Asia.
- Suez Canal
Carrying roughly 12% of global trade, the canal remains vulnerable. The Ever Given blockage in 2021 exposed the risks posed by narrow, single-lane stretches, which remain even after modest expansions.
- Strait of Malacca
One of the most trafficked shipping routes in the world, the strait faces piracy risks and has limited navigational width. Regional ports often operate near capacity, compounding transit delays.
- Singapore Strait
A linchpin for east-west shipping, the strait faces mounting traffic. Its proximity to the Port of Singapore increases complexity, especially for ships navigating tight transshipment schedules.
- Strait of Gibraltar
With more than 100,000 ship crossings annually, this passage remains a bottleneck. Military exercises, regional conflicts, and port restrictions add to traffic unpredictability.
- Northern Sea Passage
While climate change has opened this Arctic route, unpredictable weather, limited infrastructure, and rising political tensions continue to constrain its commercial use.
- English Channel
As the world’s busiest shipping lane, the Channel is increasingly burdened. Post-Brexit regulatory changes have added layers of customs and inspection that slow transit.
Foreign regulations, operational practices, and climate risks converge to strain global shipping lanes
The FMC is scrutinizing a mix of regulatory, operational, and environmental factors. At the heart of the inquiry are the practices of foreign port authorities and national regulators that control access, fees, and priority at key routes.
Canal and strait operators often set terms with little external oversight. This creates uncertainty for shipping lines operating under tight delivery schedules. The commission is evaluating whether these policies disproportionately affect U.S.-bound or U.S.-flagged cargo.
Operational decisions by shipping companies also play a role. “Slow steaming”—reducing speed to cut fuel costs—saves money but reduces scheduling accuracy, compounding delays at high-traffic junctions. These tactics may be economically rational but can intensify congestion across networks.
Environmental stressors are adding new challenges. Reduced rainfall has lowered water levels at the Panama Canal, cutting available transit slots. Meanwhile, melting ice has made the Northern Sea Passage more accessible but not more reliable, given the absence of critical safety infrastructure.
The geopolitical overlay is also hard to ignore. Military standoffs or trade disputes near chokepoints can disrupt passage without warning. The FMC’s view is that unmanaged, these pressures will become more frequent and more disruptive.
Global economic impacts ripple outward from delayed and congested shipping routes
Chokepoint disruptions don’t stay local. They trigger downstream effects across global supply chains. Higher freight costs, uncertain delivery times, and inventory imbalances quickly reach end users.
When the Suez Canal was blocked in 2021, the world lost nearly $10 billion in trade per day. The incident led to product shortages, energy price spikes, and cascading manufacturing delays. One stuck ship brought global logistics to a standstill.
Recent capacity limits at the Panama Canal have forced vessels to detour thousands of miles. These workarounds burn more fuel and increase shipping rates. Retailers, manufacturers, and freight forwarders pass those costs along to consumers.
What starts as a delay at a single chokepoint becomes a chain reaction. Late arrivals in Asia or Europe miss connecting rail or truck slots in the U.S. Warehouse timelines shift, and margins shrink. Over time, the system favors carriers that can secure capacity over those that can move quickly.
How the FMC may intervene—and how the global shipping industry is responding
The FMC has the authority to impose restrictions on ocean carriers that violate standards for fairness or transparency. Among its more aggressive tools is the ability to deny port access to vessels registered in countries where chokepoint conditions are particularly acute.
That option remains hypothetical, but the agency has not ruled it out. For now, its focus is investigative—compiling a full picture of how international practices affect U.S. interests. Still, the possibility of regulatory intervention has prompted pushback.
Some industry groups fear retaliatory measures if the U.S. imposes restrictions unilaterally. Others argue that chokepoint congestion stems from shared infrastructure gaps, not bad faith by individual governments or operators.
There is support, however, for more cooperative solutions. Proposals include joint investment in port modernization, data-sharing agreements to improve vessel tracking, and common performance benchmarks. Several port authorities have begun piloting such initiatives in response to early signals from the FMC.
Public input and transparency at the heart of the next phase
To inform its analysis, the FMC has opened a 60-day public comment period. Stakeholders—including shippers, port operators, foreign regulators, and industry experts—are encouraged to submit written input.
The commission says the comment period will help distinguish recurring operational issues from isolated incidents. It also serves as a diplomatic gesture: a signal that the U.S. wants engagement, not confrontation.
Once comments are reviewed, the FMC will publish a report detailing its findings. That report could lead to regulatory proposals, negotiations with foreign counterparts, or changes in U.S. port policy.
Sources: