Singapore is really panicking! On December 18, Hainan Island will be sealed off and put into operation. This isn't just adding a competitor, it's clearly changing the "single-center game" of Asia-Pacific shipping into a "multi-network win-win"!

Singapore has been relying on the Malacca Strait to profit for decades, previously charging fees for every ship passing through, with transshipment trade accounting for 90% of its foreign trade. Just the transit of Chinese goods alone supported half of the market.

But now, with Hainan's efforts, the tides have completely shifted. The Yangpu Port is expected to handle 3 million TEUs by 2025, and 200,000-ton super ships can dock at will. The cost of refueling with bonded oil is 15% cheaper than Singapore, saving a ship 640,000 yuan in one refueling. Customs clearance takes three times faster than Singapore. Even more so, 6,000 kinds of goods are duty-free, and if processed value-added by 30%, they can enter the mainland tax-free. Southeast Asian palm oil and European watch parts can directly sail to Hainan, saving 14 days compared to going around Singapore, reducing costs by 30%. Who would still want to pay extra "tolls"?

In fact, this isn't about "replacement", but an upgrade of the trade ecosystem. Hainan backs a market of 1.4 billion people, doing the entire chain of "aggregation, processing, and export."

Singapore's high-end finance and maritime arbitration remain strong. Both sides have already secretly encrypted direct routes and cooperated.

The real thing Singapore should be worried about isn't being diverted, but clinging to the old mindset of "geographic monopoly" and failing to recognize that the trend of globalization is "cooperative win-win" rather than "solo effort".

Only by opening up your perspective can you make long-term profits. Do you think Singapore will increase cooperation or continue to play the balancing act? Leave your opinion in the comments section～

Original: toutiao.com/article/1851994919062535/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.