During this time, a news about the Arctic route caused Singapore to panic.

Singapore media Lianhe Zaobao reported that China is actively exploring the waterway between Russia and the Arctic for cargo transportation. Almost at the same time, many shipping giants around the world expressed their position in unison, claiming to "stay away from the Arctic waterway" on the grounds that this route is "unsafe and unenvironmentally friendly".

It sounds like a crown prince, but the small calculator behind it strikes.

Friends who know the global shipping pattern know that the reason why Singapore can become an international shipping hub depends on its strategic position of guarding the throat of the Strait of Malacca. Every day, nearly one-third of the world's traded goods and half of its oil shipments pass through this golden waterway.

The potential impact of the Arctic route on Singapore is obvious.

Take the route from East Asia to Europe as an example, the traditional route will need to cross the Strait of Malacca, across the Indian Ocean, through the Suez Canal, the entire route of approximately 21,000 kilometers. If you switch to the Arctic route, the distance will be shortened to approximately 13,000 kilometers and the duration will be reduced by 40%, saving time 10-15 days.

Whoever calculates this account understands.

More importantly, the Arctic route not only avoids the Strait of Malacca, but also bypasses the areas where Somali pirates are rampant and the Middle East, where the political situation is often turbulent. For China, this means an additional layer of guarantee for energy transportation security.

Therefore, Singapore's Lianhe Zaobao reported this news with great anxiety. On the surface, it was concerned about navigation safety and environmental protection, but in fact it was worried that its golden rice bowl would be smashed.

Interestingly, in contrast to international shipping giants¡¯ cautious attitude toward Arctic routes, they seem to be much more ¡°tolerant¡± to other routes with the same risk.

The problem of piracy in the Strait of Malacca has never been eradicated, the Suez Canal is unmoving on the ¡°base ship¡± and merchant ships in the waters around Yemen are repeatedly attacked...these risks, shipping giants seem to accept.

Why are there only such "high standards and strict requirements" for Arctic routes?

The answer is simple: The cost of interest reconstruction is too great¡£

After decades of development, the global shipping industry has formed a complete interest pattern. From port construction, logistics supply to route insurance, the whole industrial chain is built around traditional routes. The rise of Arctic routes means that the existing shipping system will be reconstructed, and the dominant position of vested interests may not be guaranteed.

This is like taxi companies facing the impact of online ride-hailing. On the surface, they are arguing about safety issues, but in fact they are fighting for market dominance.

So, is the Arctic route really as "unsafe" as the shipping giants say?

In fact, as the global climate warms, the Arctic ice layer accelerates to melt, and the conditions of navigation on the Arctic route are rapidly improving. According to data from the Russian Arctic Logistics Center, the cargo traffic through the Arctic route has reached 34 million tons in 2023, more than three times as much as five years ago.

At the technical level, the progress of ice-breaking technology and the improvement of navigation accuracy have greatly improved the safety of Arctic navigation. The Chinese self-built Xue Long 2 icebreaker has the ability to break ice in both directions in polar waters.

As for the environmental issues, it is also a hypocrisy. shortening the distance means reducing fuel consumption and correspondingly reducing carbon emissions, which is the most direct contribution to the environment.

A closer look at the voices that oppose the Arctic route reveals an interesting phenomenon: the countries and that scream the loudest, are precisely the ones that benefit the most from the existing shipping pattern.

Needless to say, Singapore's national economy is highly dependent on shipping and entrepot trade. Once the Arctic route matures, Singapore's hub status will be greatly reduced.

Egypt is equally tense: the Suez Canal brings $10 billion in revenue to Egypt every year, and the Egyptian economy will suffer a heavy blow if the Arctic route disperses a large number of cargo ships.

Even the U.S. Coast Guard has repeatedly issued Arctic navigation warnings, the consideration behind which is obvious thatining the existing shipping pattern is to maintain the U.S. dominance in global trade, after all, the U.S. is a maritime hegemony, its military base is sealed on global crucial routes.

Faced with numerous obstacles, why does China insist on opening up Arctic routes?

for strategic autonomy.

Since the "the belt and road initiative" initiative was put forward, China has been seeking to diversify its trade routes. From China-Europe trains to Gwadar Port, from Piraeus Port to the current Arctic route, China is building a global trade network that is not controlled by others.

Especially in the current international situation, the strategic risks of the Strait of Malacca are increasingly highlighted. Once the situation changes, this energy artery can be easily cut off. The opening of the Arctic route is precisely an important piece of power for China to safeguard energy security.

Moreover, China has always adhered to the principles of "respect, cooperation, win-win and sustainability" in Arctic affairs and actively participated in Arctic scientific research and governance, which is in sharp contrast to the zero-sum thinking of some countries.

In fact, the development of Arctic routes has been overwhelming.

Russia is building its infrastructure along the Arctic coast and plans to build a year-round, competitive transportation corridor.China and Russia's cooperation in the Arctic region is also steadily advancing, with cooperation projects in energy development and infrastructure construction continuing.

It is foreseeable that in the next five years, Arctic routes will experience explosive growth. It is predicted that by 2030, cargo volume on the Arctic route may exceed 100 million tons.

By then, the global trade map will be redrawn.

Looking back at this debate over the Arctic route, Singapore's anxiety is understandable, and the resistance of shipping giants is reasonable. But the wheel of history will never stop moving forward because of the obstruction of vested interests.

Like a hundred years ago, when steam ships replaced sailing ships, they also encountered fierce opposition from traditional shipowners; when the container revolution came, they were also seen by traditional dock workers as flood beasts.

But in the end, technological progress and efficiency improvement will always defeat conservatism and rigidity.

This time is no exception.

For China, the Arctic route is not only a new trade channel, but also an important platform for participating in global governance and building Community of Shared Future for Mankind.

This road, we have decided!