The latest assessment by consultancy firm Drewry concludes that the Strait of Hormuz has no genuine substitute as a trade corridor for the Gulf.

It processes nearly one-third of the world’s seaborne crude and underpins critical container flows across regional hubs. Diversions by carriers have highlighted structural gaps in alternative routes and infrastructure.

According to a report by Freight Waves, Drewry Senior Associate Eirik Hooper characterises the region’s strength and vulnerability in the same breath.

“The region's liner connectivity depth is its greatest strength, and, in a closure scenario, its greatest single point of failure,” says Hooper.

He notes that the principal Gulf hub’s connectivity would be cut by more than three-quarters in a closure, and there is no nearby gateway designed to absorb the displaced flows.

Port connectivity scores illustrate the concentration of network depth at the UAE hubs, with Jebel Ali leading and Abu Dhabi’s Khalifa Port rising rapidly.

Yet the analysis finds that this concentration increases exposure: the loss modelled for a closure would strip out the bulk of available connections almost at once.

Potential bypass ports

Drewry identifies substantial latent capacity across prospective bypass ports, but this headline figure contracts when geography and ground logistics are applied.

The study stresses that practical utility, not nominal headroom, determines whether a port can sustain Gulf supply chains in a disruption.

Khor Al Fakkan Port in the UAE is flagged as the only bypass with high practical value. It sits about 80 miles from Dubai via a two‑lane highway, and emergency customs clearance has been activated to permit direct road transfer into Jebel Ali and Abu Dhabi free zones.

Even so, the available road throughput is uncertain and likely well below the terminal’s physical headroom.

Oman’s Salalah is described as a paradox: ample latent capacity on paper but functionally disconnected as a Gulf bypass, due to a road distance of roughly 1,000 miles to Dubai and no rail link.

Trucking a standard container on that lane is deemed prohibitive relative to drayage from Jebel Ali.

On the Red Sea side, Saudi ports such as Jeddah and King Abdullah can serve domestic demand, but there is no rail connection from Jeddah to the interior. Construction has not begun on a planned 600‑mile inland freight corridor, leaving containers to move long distances by truck.

Transhipment challenges

The transhipment model compounds the exposure.

Jebel Ali relies heavily on relay traffic, so losses from a closure would spread beyond the UAE gateway market. Feeder services to Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain depend on cargo first reaching Jebel Ali via Khorfakkan, Fujairah or Sohar.

Abu Dhabi’s similar transhipment exposure, alongside a major investment to attract leading carriers, is now effectively marooned. The sole rail bypass to Fujairah offers limited relief, forcing relay volumes to shift to hubs in the Mediterranean, Asia and Africa.

Operators have already announced emergency surcharges and diversions to manage the situation. The analysis outlines a three‑stage horizon:

• In the first six months, severe disruption is the baseline for Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq, with food security and temperature‑controlled cargo under early stress.
• Over the following 6–24 months, logistics costs are expected to rise sharply.
• Beyond 24 months, transformative projects – including the long‑planned GCC Railway and a Jeddah–Dammam–Kuwait corridor – become plausible.

The challenge, Drewry warns, is that infrastructure timelines are measured in years, while the market requires solutions measured in days.