Posts

Since early January, news items have appeared in the Israeli press that the Chinese shipping giant COSCO “has decided to stop sailing to Israel.” The road to even more alarming news was short and swift, from “the cessation of the Chinese COSCO shipping to Israel will increase the cost of living” to the conclusion that “China chose Iran.” A number of facts may help clarify the issue, and prevent jumping to hasty conclusions:

1. Already for years before the war, COSCO ships did not arrive in Israel directly from Asia. Containers from Asia (and this is the main trade in which COSCO is involved in the Israeli context) arrived at the port of Piraeus for “transshipment,” or “reloading” – that is, they were transferred to small feeder ships that transported the containers to Israel.
2. COSCO was not the first company to refuse to accept cargo to Israel, nor was it the only one: the Ocean alliance, in which COSCO is a member, includes the Taiwanese company Evergreen, COSCO’s subsidiary OOCL, and the French company CMA CGM, which in any case has boycotted Israel in practice since the day it was founded. COSCO and OOCL stopped accepting orders in Asia-Israel trade back in December, though they did not formally announce this (OOCL announced such a break, but apparently quickly retracted it – in practice this situation remains the same). Evergreen also stopped accepting such orders that month, and was the only one to formally announce this.
3. The only change that occurred in early January was that COSCO officially announced the cessation of its activity in the trade between Israel and the Western Mediterranean, together with the cessation of its partnership in this line with Zim.
4. The assumption in various news reports that China as a country is behind COSCO’s decision is problematic, when both a Taiwanese company and a French company operate in the same way, and did so perhaps even before COSCO, and without information confirming this assumption. Although COSCO is a state-owned company, it would be wrong to assume that every decision it makes, however significant, necessarily runs through the corridors of the Chinese government.
5. The shipping companies that operated to transport cargo to/from Israel in the other shipping alliances (for example the 2M alliance, which is the most significant alliance in Israel's foreign trade, including the activities of MAERSK and MSC outside of the framework of the alliance) continue to visit Israel anyway (directly or through reloading). Since the competition in this field is tight, there are alternatives to COSCO in trade with Asia (and the other companies in this alliance) for Israeli exporters/importers.
6. China itself, as the largest exporter in the world and the second largest importer in the world (or third, after the European Union), is affected by the situation in the Red Sea, and COSCO and its alliance are not the only companies that serve China. In fact, some of COSCO’s ships, especially the line shipping (container) ships, are also prevented from crossing through the Red Sea. Nonetheless, China has refrained from explicitly condemning the Houthis, declaring that the root of the problem lies in the Israeli moves in Gaza, and in the “destabilizing” American actions in the region.

The cessation of activities by COSCO and its subsidiaries (perhaps temporarily) has negligible significance for Israel. This does not mean that the maritime trade situation as a whole is negligible; rather, the situation is unusual, both in the sense of transportation fees, which have risen dramatically (although they are still about a third of the level of prices that the global and Israeli market paid up to a year and a half ago, during the COVID pandemic and its aftermath), and in the lengthening of transportation time from Asia to the West by about a month, a problem that is not unique to Israel. But this has nothing to do with the COSCO issue. About a third of the volume of container activity in the State of Israel is to/from Asia. Normally all is transported through the Red Sea, which means that it represents about ten percent of the total volume of Israeli trade, and this certainly has an impact. Israel must act so that other shipping companies do not follow the path of the Ocean alliance, especially in light of rumors of contacts between several shipping companies and the Houthis. Finally, even though China did not stand by Israel during the war, it is important to keep to facts and not fan the flames of incitement with unfounded statements. Israel's enemies, and Iran in particular, have eagerly jumped on this news, citing the Israeli media, and all this without any connection to what is actually happening.