[Jeff Head]

Note my prior comment:

presuming we had the control of enough land, air and sea space around it

With that in mind, if we wanted to secure it, we would alleviate the issues you spoke of. But we have chosen to go the other direction.

[WoofDog123]

"presuming we had the control of enough land, air and sea space around it"

Even then, the canal is still vulnerable to non-conventional assault, thus my comment about the fact that the locks are very close to residential areas, road, etc., at several points. the level of alert needed to prevent the likelihood of this via large-scale roadblocks, obstacles, etc., is so high that we would have to be at war already AND have indications of a threat to the canal for it to happen.

It might very well be defensible against a traditional military strike, but the enemy wouldn't have to limit themselves to this.