01/20/2025 / By Arsenio Toledo
The Strait of Malacca, a narrow waterway connecting the Indian and Pacific Oceans, is one of the world’s most critical maritime choke points.
Over 30 percent of global maritime crude oil trade passes through this 550-mile-long strait, with more than 90 percent of that oil originating from the Persian Gulf and Africa.
For China, the strait is a lifeline. Eighty percent of its maritime energy imports and 60 percent of its global trade rely on this route. Yet, the strait is also a flashpoint for geopolitical tensions, as the United States strengthens its military presence in the region and China seeks alternatives to reduce its dependence on this vulnerable artery.
The strait’s strategic importance has only grown over time. Historically, it has been a vital trade route since the days of the Silk Road, linking East Asia with the Middle East, Europe, and Africa.
Today, it handles $3.5 trillion in annual trade, with 90,000 vessels passing through its waters each year. However, its narrowest points, such as the Phillips Channel near Singapore, are just 1.7 miles wide, creating bottlenecks that slow traffic and increase risks.
The U.S. has long recognized the strait’s strategic value. In 2019, Singapore and the U.S. signed a protocol amending a 1990 agreement, allowing U.S. warships to use Singaporean facilities. This move solidified Singapore as the home of the largest U.S. military base in Asia, with the U.S. Navy’s Seventh Fleet able to deploy to the Indian Ocean and the Gulf region within 24 hours.
The U.S. has also deepened military cooperation with Malaysia, the Philippines and other Southeast Asian nations, ensuring its ability to control the strait in times of conflict. (Related: Malaysia, which controls 25 percent of the world’s sea route trade via the Strait of Malacca, announced it is joining BRICS.)
For China, this U.S. presence is a source of concern. In 2003, then-Premier Hu Jintao coined the term “Malacca Dilemma” to describe China’s vulnerability to a potential naval blockade. A blockade could cripple China’s economy, as its strategic oil reserves would last only 60 days. To mitigate this risk, China has pursued alternatives, including the Belt and Road Initiative, which aims to create new trade routes bypassing the strait.
One such alternative is the proposed Kra Canal in Thailand, a 100-kilometer (62 miles) artificial waterway that would connect the Gulf of Thailand to the Andaman Sea through the Isthmus of Kra.
This canal would shorten shipping routes by 1,000 kilometers (621 miles), reducing reliance on the Strait of Malacca. Chinese state-owned companies have already conducted feasibility studies and have been busy over the past decade lobbying the Thai government to begin construction.
However, the project still faces significant hurdles, including environmental concerns, internal political instability – especially in 2014 following a military coup in Bangkok – and opposition from Singapore, which stands to lose its status as a maritime hub. All these roadblocks have stalled the beginning of the project.
Despite these challenges, the Kra Canal remains a tantalizing prospect for China.
“The canal would be controlled by China,” wrote analyst and international relations expert Giancarlo Elia Valori for Modern Diplomacy. “And while Thailand may not operate it as planned, it would reap the greatest benefits.”
The strait’s challenges extend beyond geopolitics. Piracy, once a major threat, has declined significantly due to increased military patrols by the U.S., China and regional navies. However, environmental issues like haze from Indonesian bushfires continue to disrupt shipping. Singapore has taken a leading role in addressing these problems, using satellite imagery to monitor fires and coordinating with Indonesia to mitigate their impact.
Regional cooperation is key to maintaining the strait’s security and efficiency. The U.S. has worked to strengthen ties with Indonesia, which plays a pivotal role in the strait’s governance. Meanwhile, China has invested heavily in Malaysia and other Southeast Asian nations, seeking to build trust and secure its interests.
The Strait of Malacca is a microcosm of the broader U.S.-China rivalry. While both nations benefit from the strait’s role as a global trade artery, their competing interests could destabilize the region. The U.S. seeks to maintain its military dominance, while China is determined to reduce its reliance on this vulnerable choke point.
As tensions rise, the strait’s future remains uncertain. “The Malacca Strait is critical for U.S. military effectiveness in the region,” said Lucas Myers, an Asia Program Senior Associate for the Wilson Center. “Protecting access to it and denying it to China during a wartime scenario is paramount.”
Watch this clip warning about China’s plans to set up military facilities overseeing the Strait of Malacca and the Straits of Hormuz.
This video is from the channel Chinese Taking Down Evil CCP on Brighteon.com.
Red Sea shootdown: Did the Houthis play a role in the U.S. Navy’s “friendly fire” incident?
SABOTAGE? Chinese vessel accused of intentionally severing undersea cables in Europe.
Geopolitical analyst warns of economic chaos should Iran shut down Strait of Hormuz.
U.S. warns China about plans to increase military drills in South China Sea region.
Sources include:
Tagged Under:
Asia, big government, China, choke-points, foreign relations, geopolitics, globalism, Kra Canal, Malacca, national security, piracy, politics, shipping, Singapore, Southeast Asia, Strait of Malacca, Thailand
This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
COPYRIGHT © 2018 ENSLAVED.NEWS
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. Enslaved.news is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. Enslaved.news assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.