NEWSLINKS
US EDITION
COLUMNISTS
DIARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
THE STATES
ELECTIONS
ARCHIVES

Search the Internet          Tips

Recent Columns

The navy's white      elephant By George, he's back Remember Kashmir? The fight begins at       home Give him something to      fight for

A coalition at sea

On the joyous occasion of Deepavali and while we celebrate the fall of the Taleban, consider the following sobering scenario. A 350,000 ton tanker laden with over a million barrels of crude is hijacked by some Al Qaeda terrorists somewhere in the Arabian Sea, who then make their way to 20 miles off Bombay and issue an ultimatum to the Indian government. Either you meet our demands or we blow up the ship. Their demands include the release of many terrorists in Kashmir and the stopping of any further anti-terrorist activity. And yes, they would also like an immediate announcement of a Padma Bhushan for Dawood Ibrahim.

A nightmare? Certainly. Preposterous? Of course. Impossible? Not at all. Hijacking at sea is a reality one cannot ignore in future. In the wide spectrum of terrorist activities which stretch from kidnapping a minister's daughter to attacking the World Trade Centre, it lies somewhere in between. It is also far easier to carry out. Consider the following:

• Europe depends on the Gulf for more than 60 per cent of its oil supply, Japan for more than 90 per cent. Each day more than 100 fully laden tankers, some of them of more than 300,000 tons, make their way out of the Gulf towards the southern tip of Africa and towards the Malacca Straits. Each has a crew of not more than 20.
• All these ships originate in the Gulf -- Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, UAE, Kuwait and Oman, countries where some terrorist organisations have a strong presence. It would be perfectly possible for a few terrorists to infiltrate on board.
• Piracy at sea is becoming rampant. At present it is strong in the South China Seas and Indonesian and Philippine waters, but it will not be particularly difficult for any such organisations to operate from the remote Baluch, Iranian or Omani coasts. Pirates are experts at boarding even fast-moving ships at sea and capturing a tanker at sea is far easier than hijacking an aircraft.
• A hijacked tanker is potentially a threat to any maritime country. A major oil spill can devastate a country's fishing and tourism industry for years. A cleanup operation can cost millions of dollars, an amount which poor countries can ill afford.

During the seventies and eighties the Indian Ocean was teeming with foreign ships. The Soviet Navy had a large presence in the Arabian Sea and bases at Socotra, Aden and Berbera (Somalia). The Americans countered by creating a base at Diego Garcia and took over Bahrain from the British. The Royal Navy, the French Navy and even the Germans visited the area frequently.

The common Indian refrain in those days was "Indian Ocean as a zone of peace". In fact, the United Nations even adopted a resolution asking foreign warships to respect the wishes of the littoral states by not bringing the Cold War into the area. Of course, no one paid the slightest attention.

The end of the Cold War saw the Russians leaving the Indian Ocean. The American presence has been considerably reduced, except of course when fighting Afghanistan.

Oil is our lifeline and our oil as well as that of our allies comes from the Gulf. Who will protect it if we go, said the Americans. The countries of the littoral will police the Indian Ocean, said India. Well, the time has come to put our money where our mouth is.

Concerned with a declining economy and the rising cost of maintaining a naval presence in far-off seas, the Americans want India to pick up some of the burden. They would like the Indian Navy to underwrite the safety of ships in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean.

Of course, the US also wants many other things as part of an alliance, but we are not concerned about that here.

India should consider the US proposal carefully before rejecting it out of hand. Our first knee-jerk reaction would always be to say "nyet". Possibly, the government is far more concerned about the reaction of our leftists than the advantages of the proposal.

Indeed, the US proposal comes with considerable pluses for India and the navy. To start with, it will open up US technology to India. With the assistance of US satellites the navy can track every ship in the Indian Ocean. The maritime cooperation can also mean better communications, logistics and understanding of each other.

Even more important is the fact that both the navy and the Coast Guard can be actively engaged in a worthwhile job. There is nothing worse than an idle armed force with nothing to do.

Terrorism or hijacking at sea also has its negative side for the hijackers. The time factor will always be against them. It does take time for a ship to travel and this gives far more time for a victim country to react. The shipmaster also has plenty of time to warn shore authorities. All ships are at present fitted with Global Maritime Distress Signalling Station equipment which automatically transmits a distress call and pinpoints a ship's position by satellite. It will not be very difficult to add a special hijacking button to the equipment to enable the master to inform shore authorities.

But why stop at only a US-India agreement. All maritime nations are equally susceptible to terrorism on the high seas, Indian Ocean littoral nations even more so. The coalition against terrorism can be extended to sea. All major countries on the Indian Ocean littoral with sizeable navies can come together to combat the scourge of maritime terrorism. India can be a partner with South Africa, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and, of course, Pakistan. Our rivalry on land should not be carried out to sea. We can even give a cute name to such a cooperative effort. What about Coalition against Sea Terrorism, COST?

The name is appropriate because the cost of maintaining such an organisation and mounting patrols will be high. This is where the US, Europe and Japan can help. After all, most of the oil that such a coalition will be guarding will belong to these countries. But such financing will be far cheaper than keeping a permanent presence and maintaining bases in the Indian Ocean.

Indian leaders were piqued when their immediate offer after September 11 was largely ignored. Now is the chance for India to show some statesmanship and push for an Indian Ocean coalition force to combat terrorism at sea. For the threat is real and immediate. One cannot prevaricate and wait until the first of that spilled oil hits the beautiful beaches at Goa.

Admiral (retd) J G Nadkarni