| Published on 09-04-2007 In National |
| Viewed 1223 times |
| Why not joint patrolling? |
|
|
Written by
K.Venkataramanan |
Sri Lanka has for a long time favoured joint patrolling by its Navy and the Indian Navy in the martime zones adjoining and dividing the two countries. However, India has resisted the idea. There is perennial suspicion in India, both among the establishment and in the pro-LTTE groups and political parties in Tamil Nadu, that joint patrolling may result in the Indian forces getting militarily embroiled again in the internal affairs of Sri Lanka.
In recent days, the idea of joint patrolling, or its softer alternative, coordinated patrolling, has gained ground as a means of ensuring the safety of Indian fishermen whose lives are under grave threat. Sri Lanka has been raising the matter with the Indian authorities, mainly as a measure to counter the impression in Tamil Nadu that its Navy is behind the repeated instances of fatal firing on fishermen from the state's coastal districts.
Sri Lanka has not only offered to cooperate in any investigation to find out who the perpetrators are, but also expressed readiness to have joint monitoring of the international maritime boundary line and its environs to prevent future incidents of a similar nature. The idea of joint patrolling, however, has run into fierce opposition in Tamil Nadu, both from Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi and opposition leader J. Jayalalithaa.
Such coordinated opposition to any coordinated or joint action by the Indian and Sri Lankan naval forces to patrol the maritime boundary is, to say the least, exasperating and illogical. For some inexplicable reason, an impression is sought to be created in Tamil Nadu that joint patrolling of the sea by the two navies will be 'dangerous' (Tamil Nadu's former Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa), 'fraught with more disadvantages than advantages' and 'it will complicate the issue' (Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi).
It is not normal that these two leaders agree on anything, but it is clear that they do not want to move away from the dominant line of thinking relating to the problems faced by fishermen from coastal districts of Tamil Nadu.
The main strands in this dominant thought pattern are that all firings on Indian fishermen are being committed by the Sri Lankan Navy, that joint patrolling will 'drag' India into the island nation's 'internal conflict' and that India will be trapped into fighting the 'Sea Tigers'. Instead, the proponents of this view want the Indian Navy and Coast Guard to step up surveillance to stop the Sri Lankan Navy from firing at the fishermen.
This view will only result in the continuance of smuggling activities by and on behalf of the Tamil Tigers and to prevent the emergence of a coordinated and lawful mechanism that may prevent Indian fishermen from crossing the maritime boundary line and at the same time assure them of some safety.
Even Jayalalithaa, who cannot be normally accused of propagating the LTTE's views, referred to the idea of joint patrolling as a ploy to drag India into Sri Lanka's internal problems. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The fact is India and Sri Lanka, with sovereign naval forces, are the only legitimate players in the sea adjoining and dividing the two nations, and there should be no room for a third naval player, viz., the sea-going wing of the Tigers.
The question of India being trapped into a conflict with the 'Sea Tigers' does not arise, because Indian forces are going to keep off Sri Lanka's territory. Any chance encounter at sea with the 'Sea Tigers' should not be viewed as a military engagement between the Tamil rebels and India, but rather as one between a sovereign Navy and a rogue outfit that has no business to roam the seas.
International law allows innocent passage on sea waters only for unarmed vessels. Armed vessels should belong to a Navy of a sovereign nation, and non-State warships have no immunity from inspections by naval forces adhering to the law of the seas.
Nordic monitors observing the ceasefire agreement in Sri Lanka have categorically ruled against the legitimacy of 'Sea Tiger' activities, based on sound application of international law. 'The sea surrounding Sri Lanka is a Government-Controlled Area. This has been ruled so by the Head of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission in line with international law. Non-state actors cannot rule open sea waters or airspace. The LTTE has therefore no rights at sea,' the SLMM said in a statement last year.
The onus should be on the 'Sea Tigers' to avoid any conflict at sea with the Indian Navy, and it ought not to be India's concern. Indian concerns should necessarily revolve around the safety of its fishermen, and if joint patrolling can provide a modicum of safety to them, it should not be ignored based on specious arguments advanced by Tiger supporters.
|
|
|
|
|
| Social Web |  |
| |
|
|
| |
Processing please wait ...
Top Stories
