GPS jamming created widespread operational headaches, affecting over 13,000 vessels globally — particularly during the Iran conflict, which disrupted AIS signals and forced significant cargo rerouting. This turbulence notably impacted crude oil exports and contributed to mounting congestion at strategic ports like Singapore and Busan.

This report provides a detailed analysis of these critical trends, offering insights and actionable recommendations to help stakeholders better understand, anticipate, and respond to emerging maritime risks.

Vessel & Company Sanctions

• In Q2 2025, the pace of new designations and alignment designations of maritime companies noticeably slowed, returning to typical levels after peaking in the previous quarter.
• While the overall number of sanctioned companies declined in Q2 2025, sanctions expanded into additional maritime sectors, including flag registries, financial services, and port operators.
• 60% of newly sanctioned companies were concentrated in just four countries:
  • UAE
  • Hong Kong
  • Marshall Islands
  • Panama

GPS Jamming

Maritime Trends from the Iran Conflict

GPS Jamming

The Iran–Israel conflict triggered the emergence of a new and highly disruptive GPS jamming hub in the Arabian Gulf. Although the conflict was brief, its impact on maritime safety and security in the region was significant and far-reaching.

• Between June 13–24, more than 12,000 GPS jamming incidents were recorded, impacting over 3,000 vessels worldwide.
• This period saw a 153% spike in the daily number of jamming-affected vessels compared to the Q2 2025 monthly average.

Divergence of Maritime Traffic

• During the conflict period (June 13–24), reported port calls in Pakistan rose by 21% compared to the days preceding the conflict — likely reflecting vessel rerouting and shifting regional activity patterns.

Crude Oil Exports (In Collaboration with Vortexa)

• June 2025 recorded the highest single-month crude oil export volume of the year, reaching 56.7 million BPD — a 315% increase over the monthly average for the rest of 2025.
  • This figure was approximately 7–10 million BPD higher than typical monthly volumes in 2025, marking a sharp and notable surge.
• The spike in June exports was largely driven by the week of June 9–15, just before the onset of the Iran conflict. This pre-conflict window likely prompted a surge in loadings, as exporters moved to front-load shipments amid rising regional tensions.
  • The week of June 9–15 accounted for approximately 17.4 million BPD — around 28% of June’s total crude oil exports. This marked a clear outlier, significantly above the average weekly range of 11–13 million BPD.

• Northeast Asia (NEA) stands out as the primary destination of crude oil exports during that week, with a total of ~9 million BPD – accounting for over 54% of the total exports for the week.
• During the week of the Iran conflict (June 16–22), crude oil export volumes fell by roughly 24%, reflecting immediate disruptions to regional shipping activity.

Strategic Port Insights for Smarter Maritime Logistics

• In Q2 2025, Singapore port saw a 65% rise in the monthly average of ‘TSP Changed’ exceptions and a 35% increase in ‘TSP Rollover’ exceptions compared to Q1, highlighting growing volatility in transshipment schedules.
  • Red Sea diversions prompted by ongoing Houthi attacks are driving vessel congestion and extended queues at alternative ports, straining regional logistics and increasing turnaround times.
  • According to Russell Group, ongoing congestion at Singapore, Port Klang, and Tanjung Pelepas has put an estimated $131 billion in trade at risk.
• In Q2 2025, Busan port saw a 54% rise in the monthly average of ‘POL Late Departure’ exceptions and a dramatic 556% surge in ‘POL Rollover’ exceptions compared to Q1.
  • Busan experienced vessel bunching in early 2025, with average wait times reaching 1.5 days. This disruption cascaded into Q2, as berthing and handling schedules fell out of sync, compounding delays and operational inefficiencies.
  • Carrier network reshuffles and a wave of blank sailings across Q1–Q2 disrupted port calls and eroded schedule reliability — primarily driven by Red Sea-related volatility and shifting trade routes.
  • Security risks in the Red Sea triggered widespread rerouting via the Cape of Good Hope, placing additional strain on global schedules and overloading transshipment hubs such as Busan.
  • Delays in the redevelopment of Busan’s North Port constrained inland cargo flow and yard capacity, exacerbating congestion during Q2’s vessel surges.

New False Flag Registries

The use of fraudulent flags has surged as Western regulators step up enforcement and open registries increasingly deregister vessels tied to sanctioned trades — pushing bad actors to seek alternative, deceptive methods to maintain access to global waters.

Q2 2025 saw a sharp and staggering rise in the number of vessels registered under newly emerging false flag registries, marking a significant escalation compared to Q1.

• • Vessel registrations under false flags in the Netherlands Caribbean — covering Curaçao, St. Maarten, and Saint Barthélemy — rose by 98%
  • Guyana saw a 105% increase in false flag vessel registrations
• Eswatini (formerly Swaziland) recorded a 260% surge in false flag vessel registrations

Q2 2025 also saw the emergence of entirely new flag registries — previously non-existent or inactive until now:

• Benin
• Malawi
• Aruba

Maritime Critical Infrastructure Protection

• In Q2 2025, drifting activities over strategic underwater cables and pipelines increased by 10%compared to Q1, signaling a continued upward trend in potentially high-risk maritime behavior.
  • The monthly average of drifting activities in Q2 2025 was 49% higher than the average recorded over the previous nine months.
  • The majority of drifting activities in Q2 2025 were carried out by vessels sailing under the flags of Panama, Liberia, and the Marshall Islands.

Dark & Gray Fleets

• In Q2 2025, Saudi Arabia emerged as a new hotspot for Gray Fleet activity. Port calls by Gray Fleet vessels rose by 152% compared to Q1.
• The Comoros flag continued its ascent in Q2 2025, emerging as one of the top three flags used by the Dark Fleet.
  • In Q2 2025, the number of Dark Fleet vessels operating under the Comoros flag surged by 103%.
• Conversely, the Panama flag saw a decline in use among Gray Fleet vessels, with a 16% drop in Q2 2025 compared to the previous quarter.
  • This decline may reflect growing regulatory scrutiny of the Panama registry by global authorities, prompting Gray Fleet operators to seek less visible alternatives.

Risk Status & Cleared Risk

• Risky port calls in the DPRK region surged by 234% in Q2 2025 compared to Q1, signaling a sharp rise in high-risk activity despite international restrictions.
• In Q2 2025, 93% of vessels involved in sanctions-related dark activities were linked to either Iran or Russia, underscoring their dominant role in driving deceptive shipping practices.

Q2 2025: A Stress Test for Maritime Resilience

Q2 2025 revealed just how rapidly maritime risk landscapes can shift. From surging vessel sanctions and false flag activity to the disruptive effects of GPS jamming and port congestion – traditional monitoring methods are no longer sufficient.

As deceptive practices become more sophisticated and geopolitical shocks more frequent, organizations must adopt proactive, AI-driven maritime intelligence.

Those who rely on static watchlists or siloed data risk falling behind. The path forward is clear: only with real-time visibility, behavioral analytics, and dynamic risk models can stakeholders protect operations, meet compliance obligations, and respond decisively to global disruptions.