When the Suez Canal Comes Back Online: Hidden Risks for Supply Chains

With hopes rising of stabilising conflict in the Red Sea region, analysts are increasingly considering what it would mean if shipping lines resume full use of the Suez Canal route, and it’s not all good news. 

While the shorter route from Asia to Europe might seem like a logistical boon, the modelling suggests there are several material pitfalls ahead that shippers need to be aware of.

Since late 2023, container shipping lines operating on Asia–Europe and Asia–North America routes have avoided the Suez Canal, opting instead to sail around the Cape of Good Hope. This detour has extended transit times and absorbed a significant amount of global container capacity. According to Sea-Intelligence, a full and immediate return to the Suez Canal could release up to 2.1 million TEU of capacity, equivalent to around 6.5 % of the global fleet, back into circulation.

However, this sudden release would create a powerful surge of imports into Europe. Modelling suggests that if all carriers reverted to Suez routing at once, inbound volumes from Asia could double for a period of up to two weeks, pushing overall port handling demand almost 40 % higher than previous peaks. 

Even if the transition were more gradual, spread over six to eight weeks, European ports would still face throughput levels around 10 % above historical highs, straining terminal operations, inland connections, and storage capacity.

Key Areas of Risk

1. European Port Congestion and Hinterland Strain
   The modelling shows that European ports are already under pressure: for example, volumes peaked in March 2025 and caused significant congestion. A sudden influx of cargo would stretch terminal capacity, yard space, equipment availability (cranes, straddle carriers), and inland transport (rail, barge, road). This could result in delays, higher handling charges, demurrage, and increased logistics costs for shippers and forwarders.
2. Short-Term Disruption Despite Long-Term Gains
   The appeal of the Suez route is clear: shorter voyages, lower fuel consumption, faster turnaround. However, the transition itself is disruptive. Routing networks have been altered for many months; returning to Suez will require significant network re-engineering (vessel loops, port rotations, slots). As noted in recent coverage, carriers are delaying return because of “complex network changes, risk of renewed attacks, and potential port congestion”. Forwarders and shippers may face unexpected schedule shifts, service changes, and interim inefficiencies.
3. Hidden Costs & Insurance / Risk Factors
   Although this is more of a background issue, the original crises which drove carriers away from Suez (e.g., attacks in the Red Sea) remain a reminder of the underlying risk. Even as a route reopens, there may be lingering risk premiums, war-risk considerations, and operational contingencies to keep in mind. (See broader context of Red Sea disruptions) 
4. Capacity Surplus & Rate Pressure
   Re-unlocking 2.1 million TEU of capacity means the supply side could tilt. If demand doesn’t absorb all that capacity, ocean freight rates may come under downward pressure. For forwarders, this could mean tighter margins or volatility. For shippers, it may be good news—but only if the transition is smooth.
5. Expectations versus Reality Timing
   The “when” of a return remains uncertain. Sea-Intelligence explicitly states their model does not predict when carriers will revert to Suez — only what the impact would be. As one article put it: “With the fragile Gaza peace deal holding, shipping industry thoughts have once more turned to the possibility of a safe passage through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal.”  Rushing in without full operational readiness could exacerbate problems rather than solve them.

European Port Congestion and Hinterland Strain
European ports are already under pressure. A sudden import surge could stretch terminal capacity, yard space, and inland networks, leading to delays, higher handling costs, and increased demurrage.

Short-Term Disruption Despite Long-Term Gains
While the Suez route offers shorter transits and lower fuel use, the transition back is complex. Network structures have been rebuilt around the Cape, and reverting will require major re-engineering, with temporary schedule changes and service disruption.

Lingering Risk and Insurance Costs
The security issues that diverted ships from Suez persist. Even after reopening, residual war-risk premiums and contingency measures could keep operating costs elevated.

Capacity Overshoot and Rate Pressure
Releasing 2.1 million TEU of capacity is likely to swing supply–demand balance, pushing rates down and while shippers may benefit in the short-term, it is likely that carriers would take drastic action to protect margins.

Timing and Readiness
The timing of a full return remains uncertain. Analysts stress that rushing back before networks and ports are ready could trigger fresh disruption rather than restoring stability.

Metro’s sea freight team are already modelling reopening scenarios to ensure capacity, routing, and contingency plans are ready when trade flows shift back through the Suez Canal. 

EMAIL Managing Director, Andrew Smith to arrange a strategic review of your shipping patterns, risk exposure, and options to protect service continuity and cost efficiency when routes realign.