Since the end of 2023, taking a long detour has become part of everyday life for many container ships. Instead of traveling from the Indian Ocean through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean, numerous services were rerouted around the southern tip of Africa. The route went via the Cape of Good Hope—significantly longer, but the preferred alternative for many shipping companies given the security situation in the Red Sea. Now, the picture is starting to change again.

On September 14, Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd announced that they would be routing four more of their Gemini Cooperation services back through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. The AE5, AE11, AE12, and ME2 services are switching from the route around the Cape to the trans-Suez route. Two other Gemini services were already using this route.

A return to normality? Not yet.

But it is a good opportunity to look at what actually happens when major shipping lines change their routes again—and why a shorter distance can have an impact on far more than just the arrival time of a single ship.

Why was Suez avoided in the first place?

The Suez Canal is one of the most important links between Asia and Europe. From the Indian Ocean, the route leads via the Bab al-Mandab Strait into the Red Sea, then through the Suez Canal into the Mediterranean, and on to European ports.

At the end of 2023, the situation changed fundamentally. The security crisis in the Red Sea led numerous shipping companies to avoid the region. Since December 2023, sailing around Africa has become the standard for a large portion of container traffic between Asia and Europe. A regional security problem thus had a direct impact on global supply chains.

What does the route around Africa mean?

A ship can, of course, get from Asia to Europe without using the Suez Canal. However, it has to travel significantly further. Instead of turning north from the Indian Ocean into the Red Sea, the journey continues south around the Cape of Good Hope and then back north towards Europe.

This means additional nautical miles and longer transit times. At the same time, fuel consumption generally increases, and ships are tied up for longer for a single round trip. It is precisely this last point that is particularly interesting for logistics.

If a ship needs more time for its rotation, it is also available later for its next voyage. To still be able to offer regular departures, more ship capacity must be tied up in the network accordingly. The decision regarding a route therefore does not just affect a single ship—it can have an impact on an entire liner network.

Now, a gradual return

This very detour is now being abandoned for further services. Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd are switching four additional Gemini connections to the route through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. This affects connections between Asia and Northern Europe, Asia and the Mediterranean, as well as India and Europe.

For Hamburg, the AE5 is of particular interest. The new rotation leads from Qingdao via Ningbo, Tanjung Pelepas, and the Suez Canal to London, Bremerhaven, Hamburg, and Rotterdam. The ME2 between India and Europe also calls at Hamburg.

However, the transition is not happening all at once. The first westbound changes begin on September 19, 2026 with AE11 and ME2. AE5 follows on September 21. The first corresponding rotation for AE12 is yet to be announced. The transition is also taking place gradually in the eastbound direction.

This is an important distinction. The current development does not mean: "From now on, container ships are sailing through Suez again." Rather, we are observing a gradual return of individual services.

How much traffic has actually returned?

A look at the figures shows just how far container traffic remains from pre-crisis levels. Sea-Intelligence has analyzed what proportion of container capacity between Asia and Europe is now once again being routed through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. For September 2026, the so-called normalization across both directions of travel averages around 27 percent for the month.

There are significant differences between the directions of travel. On the main route from Asia to Europe, the share of capacity routed back through the Red Sea is, according to Sea-Intelligence, between 13 and 25 percent, depending on the week. On the return leg from Europe to Asia, this figure is already around 25 to 47 percent in September.

It is therefore too early to speak of a complete normalization. Hapag-Lloyd also continues to describe the role of the Red Sea in its own overall network as secondary for the time being. The vast majority of connections are still being routed around the Cape of Good Hope.

Why are shipping companies returning at all?

The decisive advantage is obvious: the route through Suez is shorter for many connections between Asia and Europe. Maersk describes it as a faster and more efficient path for the affected services compared to sailing around the Cape of Good Hope. Hapag-Lloyd also points to faster transport options.

Shorter routes can enable lower transit times and reduced fuel consumption. Above all, however, it shortens the time a ship needs for a complete rotation. And that is precisely what can impact available capacity.

When the route becomes shorter, capacity changes

During the diversions around Africa, ships are tied up for longer on their respective round trips. If the route is shortened again, the same ships can complete their rotations faster. This can effectively make additional transport capacity available without the need to put new container ships into service.

This, in turn, can influence the utilization and capacity planning of shipping companies and, ultimately, the market itself. However, the extent of this effect cannot be derived solely from the return of individual services. Key factors include how many more connections return to Suez, how demand develops, and how much additional ship capacity enters the market at the same time.

A simple equation along the lines of "Suez returns = freight rates fall" would therefore be an oversimplification.

What happens to the schedules?

A route change does not mean a ship simply takes a different turn at one point. Liner services consist of complex rotations. Port calls, berths, terminal windows, connecting services, feeder services, container positioning, and available ships must all be coordinated.

If a route is shortened, the network must therefore also be adjusted. The new AE5 rotation provides an example: Qingdao – Ningbo – Tanjung Pelepas – Suez Canal – London – Bremerhaven – Hamburg – Rotterdam – Algeciras – Suez Canal – Tanjung Pelepas.

The decision to use Suez therefore changes more than just the route between Asia and Europe. It is part of a complete rotation in which various ports and connecting services are coordinated.

What does this mean for containers already booked?

It is therefore important for shippers not to automatically apply a general announcement to their own shipments. Just because a shipping company is routing certain services through Suez again does not mean that every container already booked will suddenly have a shorter transit time.

Decisive factors include the booked service, the specific ship, the direction of travel, the departure date, and potential transshipment connections. Especially during the current transition phase, different routings can exist in parallel.

One ship may already be sailing through Suez again, while another continues to take the route around the Cape of Good Hope. For your own transport planning, the specific connection is therefore what always counts.

And what about security?

It remains the deciding factor. Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd have explicitly stated that further changes depend on the stability of the security situation in the Red Sea. The safety of crews, vessels, and cargo remains the top priority.

Therefore, the return to Suez should not be seen as a final decision for the entire network. Should the situation change again, routings can be adjusted once more. For shippers, this means a certain level of uncertainty remains despite current developments.

A shorter route does not automatically mean a shorter delivery time

This should also be taken into account when planning transport. In theory, the Suez route allows for shorter transit times compared to sailing around Africa. In practice, however, a network must first realign itself after major changes. Vessels are in different positions, schedules are adjusted, port windows are coordinated, and containers and equipment must be available within the network.

Therefore, one should not assume that every transit time will immediately decrease by a fixed number of days. The specific booking, the respective service, and the current routing remain the deciding factors.

From crisis back to normal operations?

It is still too early to use that phrasing. The fact that more services are once again sailing through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal is a clear signal. At the same time, according to Sea-Intelligence, the normalization of the Asia-Europe traffic studied in September is only at an average of 27 percent.

We therefore currently see this as more of a transition phase. Some vessels are sailing through Suez again. Others continue to sail around Africa. And how quickly this ratio continues to change depends in particular on the security situation and the decisions made by individual shipping lines.

When a route changes, more than just the path changes

Developments around the Suez Canal clearly illustrate how closely international supply chains are interconnected. On a map, the decision seems simple at first: through Suez or around Africa? For logistics, there is much more to it than that.

Transit times change. Vessels may become available for their next rotation sooner. Port calls and connecting services must be adjusted. And ultimately, a shorter route can also influence how much vessel capacity is available to the market.

That is why, for international shipments, it is worth looking at more than just the port of departure, the port of destination, and the ETA. Sometimes, the route the ship takes in between is the deciding factor.