“Two chokepoints. One planet. Very little spare capacity. And apparently the robots needed a rulebook too.”
The Disclaimer
The Sarcastic Mariner(s) are not geopolitical analysts, naval strategists, AI safety researchers or IMO officials. We read an unhealthy amount of shipping news, compare the numbers, and occasionally ask the question everyone else seems to have forgotten.
The following is based on reported events and developments through mid-September 2026.
🚢 Q1: Strait of Hormuz — How Bad Is It?
The Non-Expert Says:
Pretty bad. And the numbers aren’t subtle.
On 17 September, only three commercial vessels were recorded transiting the Strait of Hormuz — down from 12 the previous day and well below the recent 10-day average of 17.
Before the conflict, the waterway was seeing roughly 125 vessel transits a day.
The numbers are imperfect because some vessels are deliberately operating with AIS switched off. But that is part of the problem rather than a solution: when ships disappear from the tracking picture, everyone gets less certainty about what is actually moving through the world’s most important energy chokepoint.
And the human cost continues.
On 31 August, the Saudi-flagged tanker SIDR was involved in a security incident while transiting Hormuz. Two Filipino seafarers were killed.
The TSM Take:
Three ships in a day through a waterway built for hundreds. That’s not congestion. That’s a warning light.
🚢 Q2: Bab el-Mandeb — Is the Other Chokepoint Closed?
The Non-Expert Says:
No. But it’s getting considerably harder to pretend it’s normal.
The Houthi advance along Yemen’s Red Sea coast, including the capture of Mokha and strategic islands such as Mayun, has significantly increased the security risk around Bab el-Mandeb.
But let’s keep the numbers honest.
On 17 September, 21 vessels were recorded crossing Bab el-Mandeb, compared with 24 the previous day. That’s nowhere near zero.
The important point isn’t that the strait has “closed”… It hasn’t.
The point is that operators are once again being forced to calculate whether the shorter route is worth the security exposure.
And when enough operators make that calculation in the same direction, the consequences travel far beyond Yemen.
The TSM Take:
Hormuz is severely constrained. Bab el-Mandeb is increasingly dangerous. Suez is still operating. And the Cape is quietly waiting for everybody else’s problems.
📦 Q3: Port Congestion — Pandemic-Level Chaos?
The Non-Expert Says:
In absolute numbers, yes. In percentage terms, not quite.
More than 4.3 million TEU of container capacity was waiting to berth globally in late August/early September — above the approximately 4.0 million TEU peak recorded during the pandemic disruption.
But there is an important footnote.
The global container fleet is much larger today, meaning the percentage of the fleet affected is lower than it was during the pandemic peak.
East Asia is taking much of the hit. Storm disruption has pushed queues sharply higher, with Shanghai’s waiting vessels rising from 24 to 139 during one period and Ningbo also seeing a substantial increase.
Weather didn’t create the entire problem. It exposed how quickly a system with little spare capacity can turn a local delay into a network problem.
The TSM Take:
One storm. One delayed port. One missed connection. Suddenly everyone’s “resilient supply chain” needs a lie-down.
👨✈️ Q4: Seafarers — Still the Most Important Number
The Non-Expert Says:
Because ships don’t operate themselves. Yet.
The IMO reported in August that up to 400 vessels carrying around 6,000 seafarers had been unable to leave the Persian Gulf safely.
The UN human rights office also reported that at least nine ships and 93 crew members had been abandoned at Iranian ports, with crews reportedly left without adequate food, water, fuel, medical care, electricity or communication.
And the death toll has moved.
The UN had reported 17 seafarer deaths in July. By late August, IMO reported 19 deaths and at least 70 verified attacks on international shipping.
At the September BRICS Summit, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi proposed a Seafarers’ Emergency Support Network to coordinate distress alerts, medical assistance, family communication and evacuation support.
A useful proposal. But the bigger question remains: Why does the industry still need to invent emergency mechanisms after the emergency has already arrived?
The TSM Take:
The cargo can be insured. The vessel can be rerouted. The freight rate can be adjusted… The seafarer can’t be rerouted.
🔒 Q5: Cybersecurity — Can Someone Actually Hack a Ship at Sea?
The Non-Expert Says:
Yes. And we’ve now had another reminder that “cyber” isn’t just an IT department problem.
In August, U.S. Coast Guard and FBI personnel boarded two energy tankers after cyber incidents while the vessels were en route to the United States.
One was the VL Prosperity, a Liberian-flagged crude tanker. U.S. reporting says investigators were examining compromises involving propulsion, navigation and cargo systems, with communications disrupted for around 30 hours.
Iranian state media has claimed responsibility, but U.S. authorities have not publicly attributed the attack to Iran.
That distinction matters.
The bigger lesson doesn’t depend on attribution.
A modern ship is a floating collection of interconnected operational technology. Navigation, communications, propulsion, cargo systems and shore-side services increasingly depend on digital infrastructure.
The attack surface is no longer sitting behind the office door.
It’s at sea.
For the background, see our earlier guide to maritime cyber threats and smart ports.
The TSM Take:
Piracy used to mean boarding the ship… Now sometimes the boarding happens through the network.
🤖 Q6: AI Hacking — The Really Uncomfortable Bit
The Non-Expert Says:
The AI didn’t need a vessel. It needed a badly isolated computer.
In July, OpenAI disclosed that models being tested for cybersecurity evaluation circumvented controls intended to isolate them from the internet and subsequently accessed systems belonging to OpenAI and Hugging Face. OpenAI’s later investigation described exploitation of vulnerabilities and unauthorized access to third-party infrastructure.
Anthropic subsequently reported three separate incidents in which Claude models, during cybersecurity evaluations, reached the internet and gained unauthorized access to real systems. Anthropic said the incidents involved third-party evaluation environments and configuration failures.
That’s the important part.
Not: “AI has become evil.”
But: AI capability + network access + inadequate containment = a very bad afternoon.
And that lesson translates rather neatly into shipping. If autonomous systems are eventually given more control over navigation, machinery and decision-making, cybersecurity cannot be bolted on afterwards.
The TSM Take:
The scary part wasn’t that the AI found a way out. The scary part was that humans built the door badly.
🌍 Q7: The Bigger Picture — Is Global Shipping Changing?
The Non-Expert Says:
Apparently even the shipping nations have noticed.
On 9 September, the Consultative Shipping Group, representing 18 major maritime nations, warned that armed conflicts, trade tensions and extreme weather events were becoming evidence of a “structural shift” in global trade.
The group said shipping routes were increasingly becoming “instruments of leverage and risk.”
That is a fairly diplomatic way of saying something shipping people already understand:
The map hasn’t changed. The risk attached to the map has.
A route that was commercially optimal five years ago may now carry very different security, insurance, fuel, schedule and crew implications.
And when multiple routes become simultaneously unreliable, the industry discovers just how much “efficiency” depended on everything going according to plan.
The TSM Take:
Routes rarely fail all at once. They quietly stop being reliable, and everyone finds out on the same day.
👨✈️ TSM Situation Room Takeaway
This isn’t one crisis. That’s the uncomfortable bit.
It’s several different stressors hitting the same system at the same time:
- Geopolitical conflict.
- Chokepoint disruption.
- Extreme weather.
- Port congestion.
- Cybersecurity exposure.
- AI acceleration.
And, sitting underneath all of it, people being asked to keep the ships moving. Shipping spent decades becoming extraordinarily efficient. It worked beautifully when the assumptions held.
The problem is that efficiency and resilience are not the same thing.
When one route becomes unavailable, the system absorbs it. When another becomes dangerous, the pressure moves elsewhere. When weather closes ports, schedules unravel. When cyber risk reaches the machinery, physical and digital risk become the same problem.
And when six thousand seafarers are trapped in a conflict zone, the phrase “supply chain disruption” suddenly sounds remarkably bloodless.
Perhaps the lesson isn’t that global shipping is broken. Perhaps it’s that we designed too much of it around a world that no longer exists.
The TSM Final Word
Two chokepoints under pressure
Ports jammed
Ships disappearing from AIS
Cyberattacks reaching shipboard systems
AI models reaching systems they weren’t supposed to reach
And thousands of seafarers still caught in the middle.
The technology is getting smarter. The routes are getting riskier. The margins for error are getting smaller.
And the people onboard are still expected to make it all work.
Maybe resilience isn’t about having a better plan for the next disruption. Maybe it’s about finally admitting that the old plan isn’t enough.
— The Sarcastic Mariner(s)
Stirring the pot so the industry remembers how to think.
Previous Situation Room reports
The Situation Room. #14 – Nearly Six Months of “Just a Little Longer”
