INS Airavat Incident: What does it Portend?
By B. Raman
The “Financial Times” of London reported on
September 1, 2011, that an unidentified
Chinese warship had demanded that an Indian
naval vessel identify itself and explain its
presence in the South China Sea waters off
Vietnam in July. It identified the Indian
naval ship as INS Airavat.
2. According to the FT report, INS
Airavathad visited Nha Trang in
south-central Vietnam and the northern port
of Haiphong in the second half of July.
3. The FT said that the Vietnamese Foreign
Ministry acknowledged that the Indian
warship had visited the country from July
19-22, but claimed that it had no
information about the incident.
4. Rediff.com reported as follows the same
day:
“A spokesperson from the Ministry of
External Affairs in New Delhi said:"The
Ministry has seen news reports about an
alleged confrontation between an Indian Navy
ship and a Chinese vessel off the coast of
Vietnam in July 2011. The Indian Naval
vessel, INS Airavat paid a friendly visit to
Vietnam between 19 to 28 July 2011.
“On July 22, INS Airavat sailed from the
Vietnamese port of Nha Trang towards Hai
Phong, where it was to make a port call. At
a distance of 45 nautical miles from the
Vietnamese coast in the South China Sea, it
was contacted on open radio channel by a
caller identifying himself as the "Chinese
Navy" stating that "you are entering Chinese
waters". “No ship or aircraft was visible
from INS Airavat, which proceeded on her
onward journey as scheduled.
“There was no confrontation involving the
INS Airavat. India supports freedom of
navigation in international waters,
including in the South China Sea, and the
right of passage in accordance with accepted
principles of international law. These
principles should be respected by all.”
5. Rediff added further as follows: “In
Beijing , the Chinese Foreign Ministry
spokesman Ma Zhaox sought to obfuscate the
issue by saying that inquiries have been
made with the "competent authorities" about
the reported incident but so far no
information has been received. Nor had
China "received any representation from any
other country", he said, implying that that
no protest has been received from India in
this regard.“
6.The media reports on the incident figured
in the daily press briefings of the US State
Department and the Pentagon at Washington DC
on September 1.Answering questions at the
daily briefing, Mark Toner, the State
Department spokesman, told journalists: “We
are certainly aware of the media reports on
an alleged encounter between Indian and
Chinese naval vessels. “Our position
on the South China Sea is very clear. We
want a collaborative diplomatic process
here.”
7. Col. Dave Lapan, a spokesman of the
Pentagon, said in his daily briefing in
response to questions from media personnel:
“I do not know anything about that
particular confrontation. Generally we have
said that there are many nations that
operate through international waters in the
South China Sea. We recognize that there are
disputes amongst countries in that region
and it is our desire one to recognize the
right of passage to those waters, but more
important that those conflicts, those
confrontations be resolved peacefully so
there aren’t any misunderstanding or things
that leads us to injuries or deaths.”
8. The visit of the Indian naval ship to two
ports in Vietnam and the incident of July 22
coincided with the meeting of the ASEAN
Regional Forum (ARF) and the post-ASEAN
ministerial meetings in Bali in Indonesia
from July 16 to 28.However, there is no
reason to believe that the visit of the
Indian ship to two Vietnamese ports had
anything to do with the Bali ARF meeting
during which the continuing dispute on the
question of sovereignty over the South China
Sea and over the island territories in the
Sea figured once again as in previous
meetings on the agenda.
9. The dispute involves the Chinese claim of
sovereignty not only over the island
territories, but also over the South China
Sea, which China claims as its territorial
waters. Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia,
Brunei and Taiwan do not accept the Chinese
claims on both counts. They reject the
Chinese claim that the South China Sea is
China’s territorial waters. At the same
time, they claim some of the island
territories as belonging to them.
10. Thus, there is a bilateral dispute
between China on the one side and these
countries on the other over the ownership of
the island territories and a multilateral
dispute over China’s claim of sovereignty
over the Sea as a whole. In recent
months, the dispute has led to incidents
between China on the one side and Vietnam
and the Philippines on the other over issues
such as the exploitation of the Sea for
fisheries and oil and mineral resources.
While vigorously asserting its claims on
both counts, China has refrained from any
interference with the right of freedom of
navigation and over flights in the South
China Sea.
11. Concerned over the increasing
assertiveness of the Chinese Navy in the
area, the Philippines and Vietnam have been
moving closer to the US. Their navies have
been holding joint exercises with the US
Navy in their respective coastal waters
without unnecessarily provoking China. They
have not allowed repeated Chinese protests
over these exercises to come in their way.
12. The US has been following a two-pronged
policy. It has taken up the stand that the
bilateral disputes over the island
territories are for the concerned countries
to sort out peacefully in which the US has
no role. At the same time, it has been
vigorously asserting the right of freedom of
navigation and over flights in the South
China Sea.
13. The clarification issued by the
spokesman of India’s Ministry of External
Affairs indicates that there is a
convergence of views between India and the
US in rejecting Chinese claims of
sovereignty over the entire South China Sea.
14. Two significant points emerge from his
clarification: Firstly, “India supports
freedom of navigation in international
waters, including in the South China Sea,
and the right of passage in accordance with
accepted principles of international law.”
Secondly, “At a distance of 45 nautical
miles from the Vietnamese coast in the South
China Sea, it was contacted on open radio
channel.”
15. What does it mean? It means that India
has admitted that the Indian ship at the
time it received a cautionary advice from a
source purporting to be the Chinese Navy was
in the South China Sea and that it had a
right to be there because the South China
Sea is international and not Chinese waters.
16. At the Bali ARF meeting and in its
margins, the US and the Philippines
vigorously articulated their concerns over
the increasing Chinese assertiveness. Mrs.
Hilary Clinton, the US Secretary of State,
told the ARF meeting: “The United States is
concerned that recent incidents in the South
China Sea threaten the peace and stability
on which the remarkable progress of the
Asia-Pacific region has been built.
These incidents endanger the safety of life
at sea, escalate tensions, undermine freedom
of navigation and pose risks to lawful
unimpeded commerce and economic
development.”
17. She warned all the rival claimants
against using force to bolster their
positions. She added: “Each of the parties
should comply with their commitments to
respect freedom of navigation and
over-flight in the South China Sea in
accordance with international law, to
resolve their disputes through peaceful
means, without resorting to the threat or
use of force.”
18. Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del
Rosario said that his country had “suffered
at least seven aggressive intrusions” in the
disputed waters since February.These
included Chinese forces shooting at Filipino
fishermen, deploying navy patrol boats to
intimidate an oil exploration vessel and
placing markers on some of the islets.
19. Del Rosario said China's actions
appeared motivated by a hunger for the
region's natural resources, and were
heightening fears about how the country
intended to treat its neighbors as its
military and economic might expanded.
20. He told the Agence France Presse:. “I
think there is that concern that China is
becoming more powerful. We support their
progress and their growth ... but at the
same time it is our expectation that their
strength and their growth and their
influence will be exercised in a responsible
way.”
21. Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi
assured that China would work to ensure that
the tensions did not escalate into conflict.
He told the journalists in Bali: “South
China Sea and Asia as a whole are peaceful
and stable, and this will continue through
our joint efforts. China will continue to
contribute to peace and stability in Asia.”
22. At a meeting with the 10 members of the
ASEAN in Bali, China also agreed to a set of
guidelines laying down a framework for an
eventual code of conduct for the sea.
However the Philippines maintained the
guidelines lacked teeth and did not change
the fundamental problem that China claimed
all of the sea, even up to the coasts of
other Southeast Asian countries. “How can
you discuss anything bilaterally when you
sit down with them and they say that they
own everything?” del Rosario asked.
23. Till now the Chinese frictions in the
South China Sea have been mainly with
Vietnam, the Philippines and the US. Despite
India’s developing strategic relations with
Vietnam, the Chinese, while maintaining a
close watch over India-Vietnam relations,
had maintained a discreet silence and
avoided any statements or actions which
could impact on their bilateral relations
with India.
24. Moreover, the Chinese assertiveness
vis-à-vis Vietnam and the Philippines was
mainly in relation to the exploitation of
the fisheries and mineral resources in the
sea adjoining the various island
territories. They had avoided an assertive
policy in relation to the freedom of
navigation and over-flights which could
bring the US more actively into the dispute.
25. This is the first time they have taken
an assertive step against a country not from
the region in order to test its reaction on
the question of their claims of sovereignty
over the sea as a whole. India has
done well to assert that the South China Sea
is international waters and that its naval
ship had a right to transit the Sea. It is
important for India to mobilise the support
of the US and other members of the
international community not from this region
on this issue.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd),
Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, New
Delhi, and, presently, Director, Institute
For Topical Studies, Chennai, and Associate
of the Chennai Centre For China Studies.
E-mail:
seventyone2@gmail.com . Twitter:
@SORBONNE75)