Maritime Disorder in the Indo-Pacific Region

1 Março 2018, 10:00 • Shiv Kumar Singh

Currently there is no viable governance model for managing maritime security challenges in the Indo-Pacific region. This dangerous reality has existed for a long time, but is being worsened amidst mounting territorial disputes, rivalry in safeguarding Sea Lanes of Communications (SLOCs), and resources extraction. Sovereignty clashes in the East and South China Seas (ESCSs) have an enduring feature due to their connection with domestic politics driven by nationalism and election cycles, and defy the deepening trend of economic interdependence/ integration in the region. In the race between regional efforts to formulate mechanisms of crisis prevention in dealing with overlapping territorial claims, for example, the Sino-ASEAN negotiation for establishing a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (SCS), and envelope pushing by certain disputants, the former is a lot weaker and slower than the latter, and heralds a further escalation of tension in the maritime domain. This demonstrates the urgency for creating an abiding oceanic governance regime on the one hand, and a mission-impossible reality on the other, thanks to the rigidness of sovereignty issues. This essay argues that the situation will become more tense before a turnaround is achieved due to a crisis that forces all parties to seek commonly acceptable rules of the game—that is, the basics needed for an institutionalised governance system in the Indo-Pacific maritime region.

 

The US Pivot policy focuses on continuing maritime dominance, especially vis-à-vis China’s rising naval power, to the effect of squeezing China’s strategic space in the maritime domains from the near-sea areas (the ESCSs) to the Indian Ocean/West Africa regions. The US naval Pivot strategy gives rise to an island chain strategy embedded in geostrategic features of the first and second island chains in the Pacific. Through enhanced allied force redeployment, a horizontal S-Shape string of pearls stretching from Alaska to West Africa becomes increasingly visible, readily made usable for blockading Chinese strategic waterways. Threats to Chinese SLOC safety are both realistic and serious. In a way, USA’s advocacy of freedom of navigation is legally undisputable; but it is also part of its control of the maritime security of other nations—for example, through close-in spy activities near Chinese strategic military bases—and thus perpetuates Asian maritime governance disorder. The unexpected ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) imposition will produce a far reaching strategic impact on the regional status quo in the years ahead. While China sees it simply as a copy of ADIZ practices of Japan, Australia, and a number of countries that require the flight report of all aircraft transiting their ADIZs, and thus address the unfair status quo, many of its neighbours get worried over this move, and see strategic ambition behind it. This endeavour will exert long term security consequences. Despite China’s ADIZ rationality in regard to its long term maritime interests, it appears to have been a premature decision, given the backlashes it has generated. There is no urgent need to have it right now. Yet, with careful and expedient enforcement, the Chinese ADIZ may not escalate tension in the short run, as observers fear. If this is indeed the case, the US-centric status quo in the regional security order will not be seriously upset in the foreseeable future. Yet, the ADIZ serves a notice to the region that the status quo has to change in due time. 

The International Law of the Ocean

27 Fevereiro 2018, 10:00 • Shiv Kumar Singh

The Romans named the sea “Mare Nostrum” (Latin for “our sea”). Till then, the ocean was never seen as “territorial”. And a new Latin term “Mare Clausum” (‘closed sea’), came into use for the first time ever. In the middle ages; the Republic of Genoa and Republic of Venice claimed a “closed sea” policy that led to “Mare Clausum” being seen as an aggressive, self-proclaimed law.  Similarly, England and the Nordic Kingdoms used to charge ‘transit fees’, declare jurisdiction over fishing areas and prohibited entry of foreign ships in their respective arenas of influence. Portugal and Spain were most prominent in claiming exclusive rights over new lands discovered by them and the sea areas surrounding these. This monopoly by the Portuguese and the Spaniards was criticised by many European nations who were prohibited from trading in the affected seas. To make seas a peaceful territory: Some kind of a balance was needed to:(a) Ensure freedom of navigation. (b) Provide a stretch of water as a buffer zone for coastal states to secure their territorial integrity.
(c) Allow coastal states to tap marine resources in the immediate offshore zone.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea treaty, is the international agreement that resulted from the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), which took place between 1973 and 1982. The Law of the Sea Convention defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world's oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources.

In the early 20th century, some nations expressed their desire to extend national claims: to include mineral resources, to protect fish stocks, and to provide the means to enforce pollution controls.(The League of Nations called a 1930 conference at The Hague, but no agreements resulted.) Using the customary international law principle of a nation's right to protect its natural resources, President Harry S. Truman in 1945 extended United States control to all the natural resources of its continental shelf. Other nations were quick to follow suit. Between 1946 and 1950, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador extended their rights to a distance of 200 nautical miles (370 km) to cover their Humboldt Current fishing grounds. Other nations extended their territorial seas to 12 nautical miles (22 km).

The Convention, concluded in 1982, replaced four 1958 treaties. UNCLOS came into force in 1994, a year after Guyana became the 60th nation to ratify the treaty. As of June 2016, 167 countries and the European Union have joined in the Convention. It is uncertain as to what extent the Convention codifies customary international law. The issue of varying claims of territorial waters was raised in the UN in 1967 by Arvid Pardo of Malta, and in 1973 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was convened in New York. In an attempt to reduce the possibility of groups of nation-states dominating the negotiations, the conference used a consensus process rather than majority vote. With more than 160 nations participating, the conference lasted until 1982. The resulting convention came into force on 16 November 1994, one year after the 60th state, Guyana, ratified the treaty.

Maritime History of India: An Archaeological & Literary Perspectives (Maritime heritage of Ancient India)

22 Fevereiro 2018, 10:00 • Shiv Kumar Singh

The concept of trade in ancient India was quite different from modern times. In olden day’s mariners, artisans, traders, Buddhist monks and religious leaders used to set sail together and this trend continued till the advent of modern shipping. The representation of art on the walls of the caves, stupas and temples enlighten us regarding their joint ventures, experiences and problems faced during the sea voyages. The ending of varieties of pottery, punch marked and Roman coins, Brahmi and Kharoshti inscriptions along the ports, trade centers and Buddhist settlements suggest the role played by them in maritime trade during the early historical period and later. Mariners of India were aware of the monsoon wind and currents for more than two thousand years if not earlier. Furthermore, the study shows that the maritime contact with Southeast Asian countries was seasonal and no changes of Southwest and Northeast monsoon have been noticed since then. This paper details the types of pottery, beads, cargo found at ports, trade routes and Buddhist settlements along the east coast of India and the role of monsoons in maritime trade. The impact of Buddhism on trade and society of the region are also discussed. The seafarers of India had the knowledge of the sea pertaining to wind, currents, tides, weather conditions and shipbuilding since the 3rd millennium BC. The geographical setting of Indian Peninsula has supported the development of seaports all along its coastline from the early times (Deloche, 1994). Majority of the rivers of India and their distributaries are suitable for navigation and ports developed along the estuarine mouths. The origin of lagoons, lakes and other sheltered bodies along the Indian coast favoured for the development of many ports, pro- vided sheltered anchorages and moreover facilitated the plying of various types of boats. The ancient literature i.e. Vedas, Epics and the Puranas also referred a lot thing about marine activities of ancient Indian people.  The archaeological, literary and historical evidences indicate that Indian mariners were aware of the use of mon- soon wind and currents for maritime trade with Southeast Asian countries for more than 2000 years. Further, Indians were the first to use monsoon wind and currents for maritime trade and the literary evidence embodies this fact. The sailors of India set sail for Southeast Asian countries during the Northeast monsoon and returned during the Southwest monsoon. Both the wind and cur- rents were favourable during their voyages and mariners scheduled their journeys accordingly. The study shows that there has been no change of seasons of monsoon over the past 2000 years and the social festivals celebrated along the east coast of India during the Northeast and the Southwest monsoons indicating past maritime glory are centuries old.

Indian Ocean and Maritime Asia Pacific – An Assessment

20 Fevereiro 2018, 10:00 • Shiv Kumar Singh

The Indian Ocean is the third largest of the world’s five oceans, making up about 20% of Earth’s water. Named after the country of India, it is bordered by Asia to the north, Antarctica to the south, Australia to the east, and Africa to the west. The Indian Ocean boasts an area of approximately 28,360,000 square miles (73,440,000 sq km), including the Persian Gulf, Red Sea , Andaman Sea, Arabian Sea, Bay of Bengal, Flores Sea, Great Australian Bight, Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Oman, Java Sea, Mozambique Channel, Savu Sea, Strait of Malacca, Timor Sea, and other tributary water bodies. The Indian Ocean is the youngest of the world’s major oceans.

The Indo-Pacific region is an area of both relative insecurity and strategic stability. It contains some significant flashpoints and has its fair share of border issues, acts of terrorism and overlapping maritime claims. robert Kaplan has argued in foreign affairs that the Indian ocean could be centre stage for the challenges of the twenty-first century, and that the maritime dimension is the key element of how geopolitics might play out.

The Pacific part of the Indo-Pacific region possesses significant multilateral structures like the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. most regional institutions revolve around the association of Southeast Asian nations (Asean), including the east Asian Summit (EaS), the Asean regional forum (ARF) and the various ‘Asean Plus’ groupings. the membership of the EAS includes India, but the various Asean-hubbed institutions have focused mainly on east Asia, while the Indian ocean region (IOR) has received less attention. although several pan-regional organizations exist in the IOR, such as the Indian ocean rim-association for regional Cooperation, the South Asian association for regional Cooperation, and the Indian ocean tuna Commission, none are entirely effective.

Southeast Asia is often regarded as a distinctively maritime sub-region. In many ways, it is the geographical centre of gravity for the wider Indo-Pacific region. Sitting astride significant chokepoints between the Indian and Pacific oceans, Southeast Asia also fringes the South China Sea, and is, thus, economically and strategically vital to the emerging economies of Asia. Southeast Asia’s westward maritime links, to the IOR, should be as strong as they currently are with east Asia. Increasingly, it makes sense to conceive of a wider Indo-Pacific region rather than the traditional conception of Asia-Pacific and its various sub- regions. economic connectivity across the Indo-Pacific region depends largely on maritime links, for trade and energy supplies needed to propel future growth. It is time to start turning this concept into a reality.

the Indian ocean is the world’s third largest ocean. much of the world’s trade in energy crosses the Indian ocean into Southeast Asian waters. with widespread concern for the security of sea lines of communication (SlOCS) across the IOR and Southeast Asia, there is no doubt that there will be renewed interest of extra-regional countries in the IOR. Strategically, we in Southeast Asia should be developing our links between the western Pacific and the Indian ocean.