Seen from Pretoria, the Arctic route could sideline African ports

Summary

In a piece published on 2 October 2026, Dhesigen Naidoo, a climate risk researcher at ISS Pretoria, and Denys Reva, a researcher on transnational threats, ask what the Northern Sea Route means for Africa. The route runs along Russia's Arctic coast, linking Asia to Europe. Warming, the authors argue, is making it commercially viable, and it is about 40% shorter than the Suez and Cape of Good Hope routes. Conventional voyages can exceed 40 days, while diverting via the Cape adds 14 days. Before the Red Sea disruptions, 15% of global seaborne trade and 30% of container trade passed through Suez. Between November 2023 and January 2026 there were 120 attacks in straits such as Malacca and the Bab el-Mandeb, and in some cases insurance costs rose tenfold.

The authors draw 3 limits. The route is not yet fit for year-round commercial use, warming brings rougher seas and cyclone risk to the Arctic, and the route depends on Russia's infrastructure and icebreaker capacity. Middle Eastern risk could thus give way to dependence on Russia. China, meanwhile, is not leaning on a single route; in September Xi Jinping signed agreements with Egypt expanding Chinese investment in the Suez Canal Economic Zone. In Africa the greatest risk lies in Egypt's Suez revenue. Cape traffic brought demand for refuelling to Namibia and Mauritius, but most ships passed without calling at African ports. The authors make 2 recommendations: tie port investment to inland logistics networks, and build proactive maritime governance under the African Continental Free Trade Area and Agenda 2063.