Maritime Lexicon Chaos: Why a Single Word Can Sink Global Trade
A lack of standardised maritime terms risks supply chains carrying 90% of world trade.
The maritime industry carries 90% of global trade, yet its lexicon is a minefield of ambiguity that threatens supply chains, security operations, and even diplomatic relations. Dr Ian Ralby, CEO of maritime consultancy I.R. Consilium, warns that inconsistent terminology, from “shadow fleets” to “international waters”, is no longer a niche concern but an economic and security crisis in the making.
The confusion begins within the maritime world itself. When Houthi attacks on Red Sea vessels escalated in November 2023, naval officers and shipping executives found themselves speaking different languages. Political leaders and military officials repeatedly referred to “shippers”, a term that technically describes those who load cargo onto vessels. The actual operators moving goods, however, are shipping lines or common carriers. The mismatch, Ralby notes, created immediate distrust: “At a time when clarity was critical, imprecise language eroded confidence in decision-makers’ competence.”
The problem extends to insurance. When missiles and drones struck commercial vessels, policymakers spoke of “marine insurance” as a monolithic concept. In reality, a single voyage may carry five or more conflicting policies, hull and machinery coverage, protection and indemnity (P&I), war risk, and others, each with opposing incentives.
A hull policy may prioritise avoiding vessel loss, while a P&I policy could demand salvors risk lives amid missile barrages. “Terminology matters because it shapes how we perceive the same situation,” Ralby argues. “When definitions diverge, so do responses.”
When ‘Shippers’ Mean Different Things to Different People: Lexicon
Even widely used terms lack precision. “International waters” is a colloquial phrase describing areas where High Seas freedoms apply, typically beyond a coastal state’s 12-nautical-mile territorial sea. Legally, however, no such term exists. The ambiguity becomes dangerous when states exploit it for political ends.
In April 2023, the U.S. and Iran traded accusations of piracy, with the U.S. Secretary of Defense calling Iranian forces “a gang of pirates” and Iran retorting that the U.S. was “acting like pirates.” Yet under international law, states cannot commit piracy, the crime requires private ends. “The misuse of maritime terms isn’t just sloppy; it’s strategically misleading,” Ralby says.
The stakes are existential. The maritime domain underpins 99% of global telephonic and internet traffic and supplies more than 20% of the world’s dietary protein. Disruptions, whether from security threats, accidents, or climate events, cascade into economic turbulence and life-threatening shortages. “No shipping, no shopping,” Ralby quips, echoing a maritime adage. “If we can’t talk about the problem clearly, we can’t fix it.”
Colloquial vs. Technical: The ‘International Waters’ Fallacy
A potential solution is emerging. The Djibouti Code of Conduct/Jeddah Amendment (DCoC/JA) Signatory States, backed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and EU funding, are developing a Common Maritime Security Lexicon. The initiative, launched at the 2024 High-Level Meeting in Dar es Salaam and reinforced in Mauritius in 2025, aims to standardise terms for the Western Indian Ocean, Gulf of Aden, and Red Sea. The lexicon could eventually serve as a global template, addressing regional variations and political appropriation of language.
One example of regional divergence is “saiko”, a Ghanaian term for transshipment at sea involving industrial vessels and artisanal canoes. Such localised terms often lack equivalents in global maritime discourse, complicating cross-border cooperation. The DCoC/JA lexicon seeks to bridge these gaps, ensuring that SAR, which can mean search and rescue or synthetic aperture radar, is never misinterpreted in a crisis.
The urgency is clear. As maritime threats evolve, so must the language used to counter them. Without a shared lexicon, the industry risks repeating the mistakes of 2023, when confusion over a single word delayed critical responses to Houthi attacks. For an industry carrying 90% of world trade, clarity isn’t just desirable; it’s a lifeline.
Sign up free to ask CAMAL AI for a summary, the key points or anything else about this story.
Related stories
CAMAL AI
Financial Ports Newsletter
The maritime economy, every morning
Ports, shipping and freight markets in one short email. Free.
