Bridging Oceans: Why an Israeli Canal Parallel to the Suez is Essential for a Thriving Maritime Future

Bridging Oceans: Why an Israeli Canal Parallel to the Suez is Essential for a Thriving Maritime Future

The Suez Canal, a 193-kilometer artery severing the landmass of Africa, has for over a century been the lifeblood of maritime trade between Europe and Asia. But as global trade volumes surge and vessel sizes balloon, the Suez, like a worn-out highway, begins to show cracks. Enter the ambitious proposal: a parallel canal in Israel, potentially revolutionizing the maritime landscape for Asia and Europe.

The Israeli canal proposal is a plan to build a waterway through Israel that would connect the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, creating an alternative or supplement to the Suez Canal, which runs through Egypt.

Why is the Israeli canal proposal important for the future of maritime trade?

What are the benefits and challenges of such a project?

This article will attempt to answer these questions and provide a comprehensive analysis of the potential and pitfalls of the Israeli canal proposal.

The Suez Canal: A Vital but Vulnerable Trade Route

The Suez Canal is one of the most important and busiest trade arteries in the world, indicating that the Middle East and Africa region, and Egypt in particular, are a strategic nexus for global trade. The 193km Suez Canal was opened in November 1869 and remains the fastest and most direct maritime trade link between Asia and Europe. Approximately 12% of global trade passes through the Suez Canal, representing 30% of all global container traffic, and over USD $1 trillion worth of goods per annum. In 2020, approximately 19,000 ships utilised the route. This represents 50 ships per day making the journey between Suez Port and Port Said, carrying between USD $3-9 billion worth of cargo.

The Suez Canal is a significant route for energy, commodities, consumer goods and componentry from Asia and the Middle East to Europe. The canal’s location also makes it a key regional hub for shipping oil and other hydrocarbons. It enables the transfer of an estimated 7-10% of the world’s oil and 8% of liquefied natural gas. Approximately one million barrels of oil traverse the Suez daily. In 2019, 53.5 million tonnes of ores and metals and 35.4 million tonnes of coal travelled the length of the canal.

As supply chains and global trade have increased in quantity and complexity, maritime vessels have grown to meet demand. The average size of container ships has increased by 90% in the past 20 years, and some of the largest ships can carry up to 24,000 containers. These mega-ships pose a challenge for the Suez Canal, which has a limited capacity and depth. The canal can only accommodate one-way traffic for most of its length, and requires convoys and passing points to manage the flow of ships. The canal also requires regular maintenance and dredging to keep it navigable and safe.

The Suez Canal is not only constrained by its physical limitations, but also by its political and security risks. The canal has been a source of conflict and tension in the region, and has been closed several times due to wars and crises. The most notable closure was in 1967, when the Six-Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbors resulted in the canal being blocked by sunken ships and mines for eight years. The canal was also briefly closed in 1973, during the Yom Kippur War, and in 2011, during the Egyptian Revolution. The canal has also been a target of terrorist attacks and piracy, threatening the safety and security of the ships and their crews.

The most recent incident that highlighted the vulnerability of the Suez Canal was the grounding of the Ever Given container ship in March 2021. The 400-meter-long ship, carrying 18,300 containers, ran aground in the canal due to strong winds and poor visibility, blocking the passage of all other ships for six days. The incident caused a massive backlog of hundreds of ships waiting to enter the canal, disrupting global trade and supply chains. The blockage also resulted in significant losses for the shipping industry, the Suez Canal Authority, and the Egyptian government, as well as environmental damage due to the increased emissions and fuel consumption of the stranded ships.

The Ever Given incident exposed the fragility and dependence of global trade on a single chokepoint, and raised questions about the need for alternative or supplementary routes. One of the possible solutions is the Israeli canal proposal, which aims to create a parallel waterway that would offer a faster, cheaper, and more secure connection between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea.

The Israeli Canal: A Bold Vision

The canal proposal is a plan to build a waterway through Israel that would connect the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, creating an alternative or supplement to the Suez Canal, which runs through Egypt. The idea was first proposed in the 1960s by David Ben-Gurion, the founding father of Israel, who envisioned a canal that would boost Israel's economy and security. However, the project faced many challenges, such as environmental impact, political feasibility, and financial viability. The project was never realized, but it resurfaced in the public discourse in 2021, when the Suez Canal was blocked by a giant container ship, causing a major disruption to global trade.

The Route and Requirements

The Israeli canal proposal has several possible routes, but the most commonly discussed one is the following: The canal would start from the southern end of the Gulf of Aqaba, near the port city of Eilat, and follow the border between Israel and Jordan, through the Arava Valley, for about 100 kilometers. The canal would then turn west, before the Dead Sea basin, and cut through a valley in the Negev Mountains, for about 70 kilometers. The canal would then turn north again, and bypass the Gaza Strip, before reaching the Mediterranean Sea, near the port city of Ashkelon. The total length of the canal would be about 250 kilometers, and the depth and width would be designed to accommodate the largest ships in the world.

The canal proposal has several potential benefits for the future of maritime trade, as well as for Israel and the region. Some of the arguments in favor of the project are:

It would decongest and increase the efficiency of the maritime trade between Europe and Asia, reducing waiting times, speeding up deliveries, and lowering shipping costs. The canal would offer a shorter and more direct route than the Suez Canal, saving about 100 kilometers and several hours of travel time.

The Israeli canal would also have a higher capacity and depth than the Suez Canal, allowing more and larger ships to pass through without delays or restrictions enhancing maritime trade in region.

This new canal would also reduce the risk of accidents and blockages, as it would be built with modern engineering and safety standards.

It would diversify and enhance the strategic options for the maritime economy, reducing the reliance on a single chokepoint that can be affected by political instability or unforeseen events.

The canal would create a redundancy and a backup for the Suez Canal, ensuring the continuity and security of global trade in case of any disruption or closure of the Suez Canal.

The canal would also offer an alternative route for ships that may face political or security challenges in using the Suez Canal, such as Israeli or Iranian ships, or ships carrying sensitive or controversial cargo.

It would leverage the technological advancements in modern engineering, making the canal deeper, wider, and more accommodating for mega-ships, the future of maritime transport.

As per the plan of project the canal would be built with the latest technology and innovation, such as tunneling, blasting, dredging, and building locks and bridges. The canal would also incorporate renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, to operate the canal and reduce its environmental impact. Further it would also enable the development of other technological projects, such as desalination plants, hydroelectric plants, and data centers, along the canal.

It would create economic spillover effects, generating thousands of jobs and attracting investment and trade to Israel and neighboring countries.

The future canal would create a new source of income for Israel, as it would charge fees for the use of the canal, similar to the Suez Canal. The canal would also stimulate the growth of ports and logistics infrastructure along the canal, such as Eilat and Ashkelon, creating opportunities for trade and tourism.

The canal would also foster regional cooperation and integration, as it would require the involvement and consent of neighboring countries, such as Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority, and could create incentives for peace and stability in the region.

The Challenges Ahead

The canal proposal, however, also faces several challenges and drawbacks, depending on the perspective and interests of different stakeholders. Some of the arguments against the project are:

It would have a significant environmental impact, affecting the marine life and ecosystems of the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, as well as the water resources and climate of the region.

The canal would require massive amounts of water to fill and operate the canal, which could affect the water balance and salinity of the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea, and alter the biodiversity and habitats of the marine species.

The canal would also consume large amounts of energy and emit greenhouse gases, contributing to global warming and climate change.

Further it would also pose a risk of pollution and contamination, due to the potential spills or leaks of oil or other hazardous substances from the ships or the canal infrastructure.

It would face political challenges, requiring cooperation and security arrangements with neighboring countries, some of which are hostile or unstable. The Israeli canal would need the approval and support of Jordan, Egypt, and the Palestinian Authority, as well as other regional and international actors, to ensure the legal and diplomatic legitimacy of the project.

The canal would also need to address the security threats and challenges that may arise from the canal, such as terrorism, sabotage, or military conflict.

The canal would also have to deal with the potential opposition and resentment from Egypt, which may see the project as a competition or a threat to its sovereignty and interests, especially regarding the Suez Canal.

It would require a huge financial investment, which may not be feasible or sustainable, given the uncertainty and competition in the global market. The canal would cost between $50 billion and $100 billion, depending on the route, the length, the depth, and the width of the canal. The Israeli canal would also involve complex and lengthy engineering and construction works, which would entail significant risks and uncertainties. The canal would also have to ensure the profitability and attractiveness of the project, which would depend on the demand and willingness of the shippers and the consumers to use the canal, as well as the tariffs and regulations of the canal.

Conclusion: The Israeli Canal as a Game-Changer for Maritime Trade

The Suez Canal served as a game-changer in its era, and the Israeli canal has the potential to do the same. In today's interconnected world, where global trade is a vital engine of economic growth, an efficient and resilient maritime infrastructure is paramount. The Israeli canal, with its potential for decongestion, diversification, and technological advancements, presents a compelling solution for the challenges and opportunities facing the maritime economy of Asia and Europe.

While challenges exist, they can be addressed through careful planning, collaboration, and a commitment to sustainability. The Israeli canal, if realized, could be the next transformative chapter in the saga of maritime trade, ushering in an era of faster, cheaper, and more secure connections between continents. It's time to embrace the potential of this bold vision and bridge the oceans for a thriving maritime future.