Sarabjeet Singh Parmar replies: The broad meaning that one can discern from various statements made about India being a ‘net security provider’ in the Indian Ocean is about India ensuring a stable, secure and peaceful environment in the region. The main aspects that are viewed as responsible for this can be construed as follows:

• India’s predominant central geographic position in the region, especially overlooking the SLOCs that pass through the region.
• India’s military capacity and capability that has a distinct reach in the region due to its geographic position.
• India’s friendly relations and defence cooperation with most of the IOR nations.
• India’s relatively strong economy and market capacity.
• India’s non-hegemonic stance and its will and ability to provide assistance when requested.

Posted on April 07, 2014

Abhijit Singh replies: The opening of the Northern Sea Route (NSR), though significant for international trade, does not benefit India directly as the passage does not offer a shorter route for any cargo or energy consignment bound for Indian shores. The NSR is essentially a passage linking Europe with East Asia. While the increasing duration of its navigability – it was open for shipping for nearly six months last year, up from four months in previous years - benefits other Asian countries like China, Japan and South Korea because of their relatively larger volume of trade with the US and Europe, Indian trading and commercial interest are minimally affected.

A permanently navigable NSR may, however, set the tone for a gradual recalibration of the international focus that the Indian Ocean presently enjoys as a 'trade highway'. Currently, the trade flow through the NSR is a miniscule percentage of global trade. But as use of the passage grows, it might result in a gradual shift in trade patterns with a relative decline in traffic being routed through the Indian Ocean. Speculative as the scenario may appear, if it ever does come to pass, India’s existing strategic clout and geo-political leverage in the Indian Ocean could be adversely impacted.

Posted on March 07, 2014

Sarabjeet Singh Parmar replies: The proposal to declare the Ross Sea region as a Marine Protected Area (MPA) was put forth by New Zealand and the US in the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) meeting held in Hobart in 2012. In addition, a proposal to establish an MPA in the East Antarctica Area was also put forth by France, Australia and the EU. The proposals were also discussed in the special meeting of CCAMLR held in July 2013 in Germany. The proposals are still under consideration and would be discussed in further meetings. The proposed Ross Sea Region MPA encompasses roughly 2.27 million square kilometres. In 1.6 million square kilometres of the MPA, research fishing would be the only fishing permitted.

The CCAMLR of 1980 is one of the three international agreements that along with the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 form the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS). The other two agreements are Convention for Conservation of Antarctic Seals of 1972 (CCAS) and Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty of 1991 (Environment or Madrid Protocol). Both CCAMLR and CCAS look at protecting living creatures. All 50 signatory nations are bound to honour all the four components of the ATS. Out of the 50 nations, 28 are consultative parties and 22 are non consultative parties. Consultative status enables nations to take part in the decision making in the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings (ATCM). The non consultative parties due to their accession to the treaty can attend the ATCMs but are not part of the decision making.

The main essence of the proposal is to protect the area’s ecological structure, environment and promote research and other scientific activities amongst other reasons. This is apparently the main motive. As the proposal needs the approval of the consultative nations, any proposal that looks at any interest that does not contribute towards the ATS would in all probability be rejected.

Sarabjeet Singh Parmar replies: China has been allotted contracts for exploration only in two areas by the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for a period of 15 years, and therefore, it cannot form the basis of Chinese assertiveness:

• In the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone (Pacific Ocean) till May 21, 2016, for exploration for polymetallic nodules.
• In the South West Indian Ocean Ridge till November 17, 2026, for exploration for polymetallic sulphides.

The assertiveness shown by China in the South China Sea is due to its sovereignty claims on the islands of the Paracel and Spratly group. In the Indian Ocean, China could be viewed as expanding its maritime footprint and presence rather than being assertive.