Latest news
Satellitenaufnahme des Roten Meeres mit Bab el-Mandeb im Süden, NASA-Archivbild vom 25. Juni 2003
Rotes Meer und Bab el-Mandeb, Satellitenaufnahme vom 25. Juni 2003. Sichtbar ist Staub, kein Rauch eines aktuellen Angriffs. NASA / Wikimedia Commons; Public Domain (NASA), unveränderte Datei.
International Politics17:30 UhrJournalPlus RedaktionReading time: 4 min0 comments

Saudi Arabia reports missile defence – the shipping risk remains

The coalition says it intercepted ten Houthi missiles. The current maritime assessment, meanwhile, reports no new confirmed attacks in the southern Red Sea – but a considerable risk remains.

The military coalition led by Saudi Arabia reported on Sunday, 25 October 2026, that it had intercepted ten ballistic missiles. According to its spokesman Turki al-Malki, they were fired by the Houthis in Yemen at the south of the kingdom and destroyed. The state Saudi Press Agency published the statement. No independent verification of the number or of the interceptions is available.

For commercial shipping this does not automatically close the Red Sea. The situation report published the same day by the Joint Maritime Information Center, JMIC for short, distinguishes between the war on land and confirmed incidents at sea. That distinction also matters for Swiss companies that ship goods through the corridor between Asia and Europe.

Ten missiles are not ten ship attacks

The Saudi statement names the southern region as the target area, not a merchant vessel. Anadolu reproduces the same account from the coalition and notes that figures on injuries or damage are missing. A second report on the statement is therefore not a second independent observation of what happened.

The Houthis can threaten targets on land as well as at sea with their weapons. That must not be taken to mean, however, that every report from the Saudi-Yemeni conflict proves a new maritime attack. Nor does the claimed successful defence prove that all ships along the Yemeni coast would be safe.

Open passage, considerable danger remains

The JMIC report, with information current as of 25 October, 13:00 UTC, reports no confirmed attacks or disruptions in the southern Red Sea and at Bab el-Mandeb in the preceding 72 hours. The strait is open to commercial traffic but remains unpredictable. The threat level is unchanged at "Substantial": under the centre's definition, a further attack is considered a serious possibility.

The report counts a total of 58 transits at Bab el-Mandeb from 22 to 24 October. As a historical comparison it cites around 61 per day in 2023. The current figure covers three days and must not be read directly as a daily value. The underlying count covers cargo-carrying ships of more than 1,000 tonnes deadweight, not every vessel at sea.

The US Maritime Administration, MARAD, warns in its active advisory 2026-013 in particular of risks for ships with Saudi links. In its assessment, calls by other ships in the same company fleet may also be relevant. The flag alone therefore does not fully describe the possible risk profile.

A quieter run of reports in one section is also no all-clear for the whole region. The same JMIC report lists an attack on an LNG tanker near the Strait of Hormuz. That strait lies at the entrance to the Persian Gulf, not at Bab el-Mandeb. Anyone who adds the two corridors together or equates them shifts the danger onto a geographically wrong route.

Container ship Reecon Whale in the Black Sea off Constanța, archive photo from October 2016
Container ship Reecon Whale off Constanța in the Black Sea, October 2016. Stock image for goods traffic, not a picture from the current conflict zone. HopsonRoad / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0; unmodified.

Insurance cover is a concrete agreement

No generally applicable new insurance premium can be calculated from today's missile report. The International Union of Marine Insurance, IUMI, explained on 21 September that insurers require additional details about the intended voyage for war risks: the area concerned, the duration of the stay and the time needed for loading and unloading.

According to IUMI, a notice of change or cancellation does not necessarily mean the end of all cover. It can serve to reassess the risk and to continue the insurance under adjusted terms. That is the explanation of an industry association, not a coverage commitment for a specific Swiss shipment. The contract and the insurer's express confirmation remain decisive.

What Swiss cargo owners can check

Routing decisions cannot be read off a single headline. The Geneva-based carrier MSC, for instance, announced on 14 September a limited return of its Indusa service via Suez for cargo carried westwards; eastwards it was to continue around the Cape of Good Hope. The notice is a dated example of differing schedules, not a guarantee of today's route for any booking.

UNCTAD describes longer routes as a burden on fuel consumption, available ship capacity and delivery times. For Swiss importers, three concrete details are therefore more useful than a blanket crisis forecast: the confirmed routing of their own shipment, valid insurance cover and a reliable delivery date. Today's interception report replaces none of these. An open strait is still not a secure or punctual supply chain.

Sources

Share article

Report an error in this article

Thanks for the tip. Please describe the error as precisely as possible.

PNG, JPG or WebP, max. 5 MB

Comments

Sign in to join the discussion.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.