Interviews | Security

Neutralizing Chokepoints: Lessons From the Hormuz Strait, Malacca, and Baltic Sea

Insights from Pekka Virkki.

A true-color image of the Strait of Malacca taken on August 22, 2025, by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA’s Aqua satellite.

The Diplomat author Mercy Kuo regularly engages subject-matter experts, policy practitioners, and strategic thinkers across the globe for their diverse insights into U.S. Asia policy. This conversation with Pekka Virkki – co-founder of Mission Grey, journalist specializing in international power dynamics, and author of the newly published book “Autopsy of Post-Finlandization: The Roots of the European Appeasement of Russia (Ibidem 2026)”– is the 511th in “The Trans-Pacific View Insight Series.”

Examine the strategic nexus of the Strait of Hormuz, Strait of Malacca, and the Baltic Sea.

They are global chokepoints demonstrating the return of the strategic seas. While their roles in global geopolitics and trade differ, there are important similarities as well. Most importantly, they illustrate the ongoing shift from the post-Cold War globalized international order toward a global political economy focused less on economic efficiency and more on securing one’s position within an increasingly fragmented system. Neither states, international organizations, nor businesses can afford to ignore this trend. How do these three regions reveal a shift in the global order? They all demonstrate the global shift toward what might be called a “multipolar coercive order.” This does not mean the old rules have been completely abandoned, nor does it mean one faces a full-fledged military threat everywhere. Rather, it means growing insecurity and unpredictability in regulations, practices, and the selective enforcement of norms. Fast, well-informed adaptability is becoming an even more valuable asset than before. What has happened around the Strait of Hormuz might be described as classical coercion: the use of geography to pressure adversaries as part of an interstate power struggle. In the Baltic Sea, we observe persistent hybrid activities that weaken trust in supply chains, energy deliveries, and regional security. Of the three chokepoints, Malacca may be the most important. Should the bipolar rivalry between the U.S. and China deepen further, the space for neutrality could shrink, forcing states and even companies to decide where they stand. Even the mere threat of escalation could increase unpredictability, encourage rerouting, and raise insurance premiums – ultimately reshaping the structures of global politics and trade flows. Explain the correlation between strategic seas and global economic continuity The so-called “rising powers” often argue that the post-Cold War global economic system has merely been a subtler version of the European imperial world order developed during the 18th and 19th centuries. While this claim is propagandistic and highly simplified, it is not entirely without merit. As the famous patriotic song declares, “Britannia rules the waves” – and even after the collapse of the British Empire, the U.S.-led collective West has treated freedom of navigation as a sacred principle that, if necessary, must be protected by military power. Quite often, deterrence alone proved sufficient and did not need to be tested. Today, however, this tradition is changing. While the system is not collapsing outright, it is increasingly being questioned and tested. The logic of global trade flows is transforming, and disruption is becoming the new normal. Previously, competitive advantage depended on finding the cheapest and most efficient means of production overseas. Now, it increasingly depends on avoiding additional costs caused by delays, unpredictable trade policies, uncertain contract enforcement, and technological incompatibilities. There is more to this transformation. Seas remain important, but they are only the most visible aspect........

© The Diplomat