Pipelines offer partial alternatives
The alternative oil routes around the Strait of Hormuz are becoming a major test for global energy security. The strait normally handles a large share of global oil and LNG flows, making any disruption a direct risk for shipping, prices and supply chains. To reduce exposure, Gulf producers are using land pipelines where possible. Saudi Arabia can send crude from Abqaiq to Yanbu on the Red Sea through its East-West pipeline, while the UAE can move oil from Habshan to Fujairah, outside the Strait of Hormuz. These routes help keep some exports moving, but they cannot absorb all the volumes that usually pass through this narrow maritime chokepoint.
New routes bring new risks
The problem is that bypassing Hormuz does not mean avoiding maritime risk. Oil loaded at Yanbu may still need to cross the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb, where attacks against commercial shipping have already changed tanker routes and insurance costs. Reuters also notes that other options, such as Iraq’s northern export route toward Turkey’s port of Ceyhan, remain exposed to political, technical or regional constraints. Projects linking Iraq to Jordan or Oman could offer future alternatives, but they are not immediate solutions. In practice, rerouting energy flows means longer journeys, higher costs and more pressure on ports, tankers and naval security coordination.
The crisis shows the limits of logistics when a strategic chokepoint becomes unstable. Pipelines can reduce the shock, and alternative ports can provide breathing space, but they cannot fully replace a safe and open Strait of Hormuz. For energy buyers, shipping companies and naval forces, the priority remains clear: protect navigation, secure crews and keep oil and gas moving without spreading the crisis to other sea lanes. The key lesson is simple: oil can partly bypass Hormuz, but global trade cannot easily bypass maritime insecurity.
Stay informed with our latest coverage of global maritime and naval security developments:
