This article is being updated as new developments emerge. The latest changes are summarised in the update log below.
For easier navigation, use the table of contents on the side of this document to jump to the relevant section.
The recent escalation in conflict between Israel and Iran has triggered a new wave of disruption across global trade corridors. What began as a regional issue is now spilling into critical maritime and air freight routes, notably the Strait of Hormuz and Middle East airspace. These developments are raising the risk profile for ocean and air cargo alike, extending far beyond the ongoing Red Sea crisis.
While some impacts are already being felt in the form of rising oil prices, longer transit times, and elevated insurance premiums, the situation remains dynamic. Importers and supply chain managers should stay alert to shifting risk levels and prepare contingency plans to navigate a more volatile trading environment.
| Date | Update summary | Region / corridor | Ocean carriers affected | Airlines affected | Shipper impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
9 April 2026 |
Early signs of increased vessel movement around the Strait of Hormuz following the ceasefire announcement, but carriers have not yet reinstated Gulf services. Maersk, MSC, Hapag-Lloyd and CMA CGM continue to route Asia–Europe services via the Cape of Good Hope, with Gulf bookings still broadly suspended. Lloyd's List Intelligence data cited in public reporting shows transit volumes remain more than 90% below normal levels. |
Strait of Hormuz / Arabian Gulf / connected global trades |
Maersk, MSC, Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, ONE, COSCO, OOCL |
EK, EY, QR, FZ, G9 |
Shippers should treat the current movement as cautious re-entry rather than restored service. Booking acceptance, equipment positioning and schedule reliability remain constrained, and any recovery window is tied to the ceasefire holding. |
|
8 April 2026 |
A two-week US–Iran ceasefire was announced, with Iran agreeing to guarantee safe passage for maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz during the pause. Maersk issued a cautious statement welcoming the announcement but confirmed it is not making changes to specific services at this stage, citing limited visibility on conditions and the need for continuous risk assessment. Other major carriers are reported to be seeking similar clarity before adjusting operations. |
Strait of Hormuz / Arabian Gulf |
Maersk (public statement), with wider carrier response expected |
— |
The ceasefire creates a potential transit window, but shippers should not assume immediate service resumption. Carrier decisions will depend on security assessments, insurance guidance and any transit fee arrangements. Expect continued contingency routing until carriers confirm changes. |
|
7 April 2026 |
Gulf access conditions remain unchanged, with no easing of carrier contingency measures or Strait of Hormuz transit restrictions. Container lines continue to operate under the suspension, rerouting and booking control settings established earlier in the conflict. |
Strait of Hormuz / Arabian Gulf / connected global trades |
Maersk, MSC, Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, ONE, COSCO, OOCL |
EK, EY, QR, FZ, G9 |
Shippers should continue planning on constrained Gulf access, unstable schedules and elevated surcharge exposure. There is no confirmed easing of carrier measures as of this date. |
|
5 April 2026 |
Transit volumes through the Strait of Hormuz remain a fraction of normal levels. Seatrade Maritime reported 15–20 vessel transits in a 24-hour window — the highest since the conflict began, but still only around one-seventh of the historic average of roughly 138 per day. Passage remains selective. |
Strait of Hormuz |
All Gulf-linked container lines |
— |
Gulf access remains highly selective and container cargo recovery continues to lag well behind energy-related traffic. Shippers should not read rising transit counts as a return to normal service. |
|
2 April 2026 |
The UK Foreign Secretary chaired a virtual meeting of more than 40 nations together with the International Maritime Organization to coordinate pressure for unimpeded passage through the Strait of Hormuz and to reject any proposed vessel transit fees. The IMO also flagged work on a framework to support stranded vessels and crews. |
Strait of Hormuz / international maritime governance |
All carriers with Gulf-linked exposure |
— |
No immediate operational change, but the session points to a coordinated track around stranded cargo, vessel release and crew welfare. Shippers with cargo or equipment held in the Gulf should stay close to their carriers on release planning. |
|
30 March 2026 |
Hapag-Lloyd's 2026 guidance identified the Middle East conflict as a source of considerable network disruption and sharply higher operational costs. The commentary signals that conflict-related cost pressure is now being built into full-year carrier planning rather than treated as a short-term event. |
Global container trades |
Hapag-Lloyd (indicative of wider carrier cost pressure) |
— |
Shippers should expect surcharge and rate volatility to continue beyond the immediate crisis window, with recovery-related costs embedded in carrier planning for the year. |
|
28 March 2026 |
Renewed Houthi activity in Yemen reinforced the risk profile across the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb, on top of the ongoing Strait of Hormuz disruption. Major container lines continue to route Asia–Europe services around the Cape of Good Hope. |
Red Sea / Bab el-Mandeb / Suez corridor |
Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, MSC |
— |
A near-term return to Red Sea and Suez routings is not on the table. Asia–Europe and Asia–Mediterranean shippers should continue planning on Cape of Good Hope transits, longer lead times and higher bunker exposure. |
|
27 March 2026 |
Transit restrictions through the Strait of Hormuz were formally extended to cover vessels travelling to and from ports of the United States, Israel and allied nations, shifting the restriction from de facto to explicitly conditional on flag and trade linkage. |
Strait of Hormuz / Arabian Gulf |
Maersk, MSC, Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, ONE, COSCO, OOCL |
— |
Gulf-linked cargo tied to affected flag or ownership profiles faces a hard barrier to transit. Shippers should reconfirm vessel flag, ownership and routing exposure with carriers before finalising bookings. |
|
24 March 2026 |
No major new public ocean carrier measures were found today beyond the latest advisories already issued in recent days. The current picture remains one of constrained but gradually stabilising air operations and continued ocean contingency management. |
Middle East / Gulf / Asia–Europe–Oceania corridors |
Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd |
EK, EY, FZ, G9, QR |
The disruption remains active, but the latest public changes are more about uneven recovery than fresh blanket shutdown measures. (Reuters) |
|
23 March 2026 |
Maersk refreshed its Middle East vessel contingency page, confirming that contingency planning for vessels transiting the region and the Strait of Hormuz remains active. Reuters also reported that Gulf airline recovery is still slow and below normal operating levels. |
Strait of Hormuz / Middle East / connected global trades |
Maersk |
EK, EY, FZ, G9, QR |
Shippers should continue to expect operational friction, slower recovery and weaker schedule reliability across both sea and air networks. |
| 18 March 2026 | Gulf airline operations remain constrained, but there are signs of partial stabilisation. Emirates is operating a reduced schedule following partial reopening of regional airspace, while Qatar Airways is operating a revised limited schedule. | UAE / Qatar / broader Gulf air corridor | — | EK, QR | Airfreight connectivity remains constrained rather than normalised. Routing options are still limited and schedule reliability remains weaker than usual, especially through Gulf hubs. |
| 17 March 2026 | Maersk issued further Middle East operational updates, including temporary suspension of empty returns in impacted import markets and updated cargo booking controls across affected Gulf countries. | Upper Gulf / Middle East / connected global trades | Maersk | — | Recovery remains uneven. Import flows, equipment positioning and booking acceptance may remain disrupted even where cargo is still moving. |
| 14 March 2026 | Hapag-Lloyd implemented an Emergency Operational Recovery Surcharge at Khorfakkan Commercial Terminal, adding to the existing fuel and contingency measures already affecting Gulf cargo flows. | UAE / Khorfakkan / Upper Gulf transhipment | Hapag-Lloyd | — | Khorfakkan-linked cargo remains exposed to ongoing terminal disruption and recovery-related cost and handling pressure. |
| 13 March 2026 | More carriers expanded emergency fuel and bunker surcharge measures, while Hapag-Lloyd also suspended DG bookings to key Red Sea ports. | Global trades / Red Sea / Middle East / Oceania-linked services | Hapag-Lloyd, CMA CGM, Maersk, ONE, SeaLead | — | Shippers should expect continued surcharge volatility, with some fuel-related charges now applying across broader trade lanes, not only Middle East cargo. Red Sea DG cargo options are now more limited. |
| 10 March 2026 | The conflict continues to disrupt both sea and air networks across the Middle East. Operational recovery remains uneven, and contingency measures are still in place across several trade lanes. | Middle East / Gulf / Asia–Europe–Oceania corridors | MSC, CMA CGM, Hapag-Lloyd, Maersk, ONE, COSCO, OOCL, PIL, ANL | EK, EY, QR | Shipment planning remains fluid, with delays, rerouting, lower schedule reliability and shipment-specific exceptions still likely. |
| 4 March 2026 | Several major container lines maintained booking suspensions, voyage deviations or other contingency measures for Gulf-linked cargo. | Arabian Gulf / Persian Gulf | MSC, CMA CGM, Hapag-Lloyd, Maersk, ONE, COSCO, OOCL | EK, EY, QR | Some shipments may be delayed, rerouted, discharged short of destination or require alternative delivery planning. |
| 4 March 2026 | Gulf air operations remained heavily constrained, with only limited controlled movements operating in some locations. | UAE / Qatar / broader Gulf air corridor | — | EK, EY, QR | Air cargo uplift remains restricted, reducing routing flexibility and affecting time-sensitive freight. |
| 4 March 2026 | Pakistan and Bangladesh air cargo flows came under additional pressure as Gulf hub connectivity remained constrained. | Pakistan / Bangladesh / Gulf hub connections | — | EY, QR, EK, FZ, GF, G9, KU, RX, J9, OV, BG, BS, MH, UL, SQ, 6E, SV, TK, TG, PK | Export cargo from South Asia is facing reduced connectivity, landside disruption in Pakistan and tighter uplift through alternative routings. |
| 4 March 2026 | Australia’s Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry issued guidance for returned chilled meat consignments affected by Middle East air cargo disruption. | Australia / returned export consignments | — | Multiple affected networks via Gulf hubs | Importers and brokers handling returned perishables should prepare for inspection, documentation and possible permit requirements. |
| 2 March 2026 | Airspace restrictions and airport disruption triggered major interruptions across one of the world’s key air cargo crossroads. | Middle East air corridors / Europe–Asia–Oceania | — | QF and multiple international carriers | Capacity tightened quickly and transit reliability deteriorated across affected trade lanes. |
| 2 March 2026 | Container carriers began implementing emergency operational measures as security risks escalated around the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding Gulf routes. | Strait of Hormuz / Arabian Gulf / Middle East shipping lanes | MSC, CMA CGM, Hapag-Lloyd, Maersk | — | Expect vessel deviations, port omissions, shipment rollovers and wider schedule instability across connected networks. |
The latest escalation between Israel and Iran has become more than a regional security event. It is now a broader supply chain disruption with consequences across ocean freight, air freight and cargo planning well beyond the Middle East. Military action at the end of February triggered airspace restrictions, airport disruption, carrier suspensions and emergency operational responses across key transport corridors. Reuters has reported that the conflict, which intensified after strikes began on 28 February 2026, has disrupted global business, air travel and shipping, while official carrier advisories confirm immediate operational changes across Gulf-linked services.
For importers and supply chain managers, the issue is not limited to freight moving directly to or from the Middle East. The region remains a critical bridge between Asia, Europe and Africa, and a major part of the world’s maritime and aviation network. When disruption affects Gulf ports, the Strait of Hormuz or major hub airports such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Doha, the knock-on effects extend into vessel scheduling, transhipment, cargo recovery and airfreight connectivity across a much wider geography.
This matters for Australia and New Zealand because many supply chains in the region depend on globally shared networks. Even if a shipment is not moving directly through the Gulf, the effects can still be felt through reduced network flexibility, cargo displacement, schedule instability and operational congestion in connected hubs.
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most strategically important maritime chokepoints. A large share of global energy exports moves through this narrow waterway, and it also sits at the centre of Gulf shipping networks that connect into wider global trade routes. Reuters reported on 5 March that tanker traffic in the strait had come close to a standstill after the conflict escalated, while later reporting confirmed that Iran had threatened to continue an oil blockade while attacks persisted.
For containerised cargo, the impact is not only about the possibility of a full closure. Even when vessels are not directly attacked, uncertainty in the strait can trigger stand-offs, route changes, service suspensions, delayed berthing and broader operational caution by carriers. That uncertainty alone is enough to affect reliability across Gulf-linked and adjoining trades.
Ocean carriers have responded with a range of emergency operational measures.
MSC issued an end-of-voyage declaration on 3 March for shipments under its custody destined for ports in the Arabian Gulf, meaning affected cargo could be discharged at an alternative safe port rather than the originally contracted destination. A further MSC notice published on 9 March extended this approach to exports from the Arabian and Persian Gulf.
CMA CGM announced a suspension of all bookings to and from several Middle East ports, including Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and parts of the UAE and Saudi Arabia, while also publishing additional advisories on shipment disruption tied to the current situation.
Hapag-Lloyd announced suspension of Strait of Hormuz transits due to the security closure, while ONE confirmed a temporary suspension of new bookings to and from the Persian Gulf. Public reporting and carrier guidance also point to other lines implementing safety measures, stand-off positions or routing changes while monitoring developments.
The practical consequence for shippers is a more volatile operating environment. Cargo may still move, but final routing, discharge patterns and delivery timing may change quickly. Even where services continue, shipment handling is becoming more exception-based and less predictable.
The Middle East is one of the world’s most important aviation crossroads. When major Gulf air corridors are restricted, the impact is felt far beyond the immediate conflict zone.
Reuters has reported that the war has upended global aviation and business activity, with flights disrupted across the region and airline operations affected by airspace closures, oil shocks and safety restrictions. Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Doha have all faced major limitations, reducing the flexibility of passenger and cargo operations across a region that normally connects Asia, Europe and Oceania.
For Australia and New Zealand, that matters because Gulf carriers are important connectors for both inbound and outbound cargo. When these hubs are constrained, airfreight networks lose capacity, routings become longer or less direct, and uplift for urgent shipments becomes more difficult to secure. Even where limited cargo flights are still operating, schedule reliability remains materially weaker than normal.
The conflict has also added pressure to surrounding air cargo markets that rely heavily on Gulf connectivity.
Multiple Middle Eastern hub carriers suspended operations to and from Pakistan and Dhaka, while other airlines either restricted bookings or continued operating with limited capacity. Reuters has separately reported that unrest in Pakistan following the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei intensified pressure on transport and politics in the country, underlining the broader instability now affecting the region.
For shippers, this means the disruption is not confined to the Gulf itself. Export cargo from South Asia may also face delays, reduced uplift, landside bottlenecks and fewer routing options where Gulf hubs would normally provide the main connection to global markets.
The operational picture across the Middle East is mixed and may change quickly.
Across the UAE, some port facilities have resumed activity while air operations remain constrained and only selective cargo movements are proceeding. Saudi Arabia appears comparatively more stable from a port perspective, although broader regional airspace issues can still affect flight schedules. Oman remains mixed, with some port facilities operational and others restricted. Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar continue to face more significant air limitations, even where some port functions remain active. Egypt and Jordan appear comparatively less disrupted operationally, but both remain exposed to regional knock-on effects through vessel scheduling, air routing and network congestion.
That distinction is important. “Open” does not necessarily mean normal. Cargo can still be affected by missed connections, selective acceptance, longer recovery times and carrier-imposed contingency rules.
This is also a cargo risk and liability issue.
War-related loss, damage and delay are often excluded or limited under transport documents, conventions and standard terms. Cargo insurance availability and conditions can also change quickly when a conflict intensifies, especially where insurers or war-risk committees adjust their view of affected zones.
From a practical standpoint, businesses with cargo moving through or near affected areas should review shipment terms carefully and confirm their insurance position directly with their insurer or broker. This is especially relevant for cargo already in transit, shipments likely to be rerouted, or consignments that may be discharged or returned under emergency measures.
One immediate Australian consequence of the disruption has already emerged in the form of returned export cargo.
On 4 March 2026, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry issued industry advice noting that disruption to Middle East air cargo routes had resulted in Australian consignments of chilled meat being returned to Australia, including consignments diverted mid-flight. The department said these would be treated as distressed consignments and outlined an interim process for inspection and import handling.
This is a useful reminder that the impact of the conflict is not confined to vessels and aircraft. It also reaches border procedures, biosecurity management, product integrity and the handling of time-sensitive shipments once they return to origin.
For businesses in Australia and New Zealand, the key takeaway is that this conflict is affecting supply chain reliability even where cargo is not directly moving into the Middle East.
The likely pressure points include reduced flexibility in global vessel networks, schedule instability in shared transhipment systems, disrupted airfreight connections through Gulf hubs, and increasing complexity in planning cargo that depends on predictable global schedules. Reuters and carrier advisories both indicate that the disruption is already having global business consequences, not just regional ones.
That means importers should focus less on whether their freight is “Middle East cargo” and more on whether their supply chain depends on networks, corridors or hubs that are now under pressure because of the conflict.
The current Israel–Iran conflict has added a fresh layer of disruption to trade lanes that were already vulnerable to geopolitical shocks. Even if the immediate security situation stabilises, network recovery is unlikely to be immediate. Vessel schedules, transhipment patterns, cargo acceptance rules and airfreight connectivity may remain unsettled for some time.
For importers and supply chain managers, the priority now is resilience rather than prediction. That means staying close to logistics partners, reviewing vulnerable routings, reassessing lead times, preparing contingency options and monitoring shipment-specific updates closely.
The most resilient supply chains will be the ones that remain flexible, informed and ready to adapt as the situation evolves.
At KLN Oceania, we are actively engaging with our global partners and suppliers to design the most reliable routing options available under current conditions. We’re committed to keeping our customers informed as the situation evolves and are working closely with stakeholders to develop realistic, proactive mitigation plans. If you’d like support navigating potential risks to your supply chain—or want to explore contingency strategies tailored to your business—we invite you to get in touch with us.