By Amara Osei

Ports on the Gulf of Oman have captured the largest connectivity gains of the current disruption cycle, with Duqm up 213% and Khor Fakkan up 188% against their pre-crisis baseline. The numbers come from UNCTAD's Port Liner Shipping Connectivity Index, assessed by Sea-Intelligence in its Sunday Spotlight, issue 785, using 2026-Q3 data.

The baseline matters here, so let's be precise. Sea-Intelligence measures 2026-Q3 against the last full quarter before each shock began: 2023-Q3 for the Red Sea crisis, and 2025-Q4 for the Strait of Hormuz closure. Two geopolitical jolts, two different starting lines, one pattern.

The pattern is simple. Ports inside the impacted regions lost liner services; ports in adjoining regions picked up the slack. Geopolitics forced shipping lines into substantial network redesign, and the connectivity index is now recording where the calls landed.

What changed on the Africa route?

Because vessels bound for the Central and Eastern Mediterranean face significant transit-time penalties through the Strait of Gibraltar, carriers pushed their African relay operations south down the Atlantic seaboard. That rerouting shows up in West Africa, where ports have posted significant connectivity increases.

Walvis Bay is the standout case on the southern flank. It became the alternative to congested Durban for Asia-Europe vessels sailing around the Cape. If you're a shipper who used to route through Durban, your cargo's options have effectively migrated 1,000-plus nautical miles up or down the coast, depending on the carrier.

What does this change for shippers and forwarders?

In the short term, it widens the menu of load ports. East Africa and Indian Subcontinent ports have acted as prominent hubs for displaced regional cargo, for carriers that wanted to avoid the conflict region altogether. That drove connectivity gains for Dar es Salaam and Hambantota.

For carriers, the redesign is a cost decision before it's a strategic one. Gibraltar transit penalties and Cape routings burn days and fuel. Every new call at Duqm or Walvis Bay is a carrier voting with its schedule against a chokepoint.

For forwarders, the practical consequence is documentation and inland-leg planning. A hub shift from Durban to Walvis Bay, or from Gulf ports to Duqm, changes transhipment windows, dwell-time assumptions and, ultimately, which gateway quotes actually hold.

The irony is familiar by now: geopolitical shocks that close one waterway are, from a port manager's chair in Oman or Namibia, an unplanned windfall. Connectivity gains of 213% don't come from marketing budgets.

The open question is stickiness. Sea-Intelligence's framing — shocks versus policy shifts — implies the distinction matters: gains delivered by a closure can be handed back by a reopening. Until the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea stabilise, the 2026-Q3 index suggests the diverted network, and the ports it now favours, remain the operating reality for Asia-Europe and regional trades.