THE HINDU EXPLAINER | Maritime Security + Labour Rights + International Law
⚓ Can India protect its seafarers in Gulf?
Context: On June 12, India summoned U.S. Embassy representative Jason Meeks and lodged its "strong protest" against U.S. missile attacks on merchant vessels carrying Indian crew members. Three Indian mariners were killed aboard the tanker MT Settebello off Oman near the Strait of Hormuz.
🎯 Why in News? On June 8, 10, and 11, the U.S. Navy fired precision munitions (Hellfire missiles) on merchant vessels Marivex, Settebello, and Jahver. While no one was hurt in Marivex and Jahver, three Indian seafarers — one chief engineer, one engine fitter, and one deck cadet — died onboard Settebello. The U.S. claimed all three violated the blockade by attempting to transport Iranian oil; India reiterated that such lethal actions against commercial shipping are not justified.
⚡ Core Argument
India has approximately 3.5 lakh Indian seafarers manning ships globally, with an estimated 23,000 serving in the broader Gulf region (UAE accounting for more than half). Most work on foreign-flagged ships — meaning India's options are limited because these vessels fall under the jurisdiction of their flag state (e.g., Palau, Liberia, Guinea-Bissau). While India did launch Operation Sankalp to protect merchant ships from Houthi attacks in 2024, and took action against Somali pirates in 2024, its ability to intervene when U.S. forces attack vessels in international waters is constrained by sovereignty norms, the foreign-flag status of ships, and the lack of enforcement powers of international maritime bodies like the IMO. The incident underscores the vulnerability of Indian labour in conflict zones and the limitations of diplomatic protest in the face of great-power military action.
📊 Scale of Indian Seafaring Workforce
3.5 Lakh Seafarers
Estimated Indian seafarers manning ships across the world
Estimated Indian seafarers manning ships across the world
1 in 6 Seafarers
On large merchant ships worldwide is Indian
On large merchant ships worldwide is Indian
~23,000 in Gulf
Serving in the broader Gulf region (UAE >50%)
Serving in the broader Gulf region (UAE >50%)
- IMO Estimate: Some 20,000 seafarers of all nationalities are stranded on ships in the Persian Gulf region.
- DG Shipping Estimate: At the start of the crisis, some 23,000 Indian seafarers were serving in the broader Gulf region in various capacities and facilities, with the UAE accounting for more than half.
💥 What Happened to the Three Vessels?
Timeline & Details of Attacks
- June 8, 10, 11: U.S. Navy fired precision munitions (Hellfire missiles) on merchant vessels Marivex, Settebello, and Jahver.
- Casualties: No one hurt in Marivex and Jahver; three Indian seafarers (chief engineer, engine fitter, deck cadet) died onboard Settebello.
- Location: Marivex attacked off coast of Duqm (some 400 nautical miles from Strait of Hormuz); others attacked off coast of Shinas in Oman (closer to strait).
- U.S. Justification: Videos from U.S. Central Command (Centcom) show engine rooms hit as well as steering compartments. U.S. claims all three violated the blockade by attempting to transport Iranian oil.
- Contradictory Claims: Settebello's manager, IOS Marine FZE (registered in Ajman), said the ship was stationary for nearly 10 days, had no communication with U.S. Navy, and had no connection with Iranian oil or ports.
⚖️ Does Foreign-Flag Status Limit India's Options?
Flags of Convenience (FOCs)
- Typical Practice: In merchant shipping, ships are often registered in little-known nations with no infrastructure to rigorously supervise and monitor ships — called Flags of Convenience (FOCs).
- Popular FOCs: Panama, Marshall Islands, Liberia, and Guinea-Bissau. Such FOCs are also popular among ships transporting Russian and Iranian oil.
- Legal Implication: Yes, technically, an Indian flagged ship will provide legal sanction for possible action. But during the Iran-Iraq war, ordered many ships to change their flag to the U.S. so it could legally escort them in and out of the Strait of Hormuz.
- Indian Action: The Indian Navy has acted against Houthis and Somali pirates to help Indian seafarers onboard foreign-flagged ships. Further, Marivex and Jahver were often serving Indian ports, facilitating India's enormous oil needs.
- Insurance Factor: Sanctioned ships lose insurance cover, without which ports will not accept calls by the ships, and charterers will refuse to handle cargo through them.
🛡️ What Can India Do to Protect Indian Seafarers?
- Operation Sankalp (2024): India did launch Operation Sankalp to protect merchant ships against Houthi attacks.
- Anti-Piracy Action (2024): Indian Navy and Coast Guard intervened to protect four merchant ships in 2024. India did take action against Somalian pirates.
- Limitations: But the belligerents in the Persian Gulf are the U.S. and Iran. Therefore, India's options are rather limited.
- Defenceless Ships: Merchant ships are defenceless. Typically, they have wireless channels open for communication with nearby vessels and any instructions from governments and Navies and Coast Guard vessels are immediately complied with.
- Somali Pirates: Coming in small craft and carrying firearms could easily board and seize massive oil tankers. The only evasive action ships have against attackers is a high-pressure water jet they can direct at them.
⚖️ Does International Maritime Law Adequately Protect Civilian Crews?
Role of IMO & UNCLOS
- IMO (International Maritime Organization): The nodal agency for regulating global shipping is the IMO, a United Nations agency. Though the IMO has the means to regulate the technical, commercial, environmental and safety aspects of global shipping through consensus and rulemaking, it has often fallen short in protecting ships and seafarers.
- Unilateral Action: Quite often, national governments take unilateral action, and typical of a UN agency, the IMO has been unable to act to prevent or take remedial action.
- UNCLOS (UN Convention on the Law of the Sea): The law governing the oceans is UNCLOS. Its acts and mandates are extensive and are an outcome of decades of negotiations and consensus-building. UNCLOS is thorough and considers various situations, including transits across straits such as the Hormuz.
- Enforcement Gap: But many nations have not signed on to it. The U.S. refused to sign it on the grounds that UNCLOS considers the deep seabed as the commons. Iran has signed the convention but has not ratified it. There really is no overarching body for enforcement. Things are often left to the good sense of governments.
🇮🇳 Value Addition — Indian Diaspora & Labour Export
India is one of the largest sources of seafarers globally, contributing significantly to the global maritime workforce. This represents a form of labour export that brings in remittances but also exposes workers to geopolitical risks beyond India's control. The incident highlights the need for stronger bilateral agreements with flag states, better insurance mechanisms, and possibly a dedicated consular response protocol for seafarers in conflict zones. It also raises questions about the safety of Indian labour in regions where India has limited strategic leverage.
🔑 Key Terms
MT Settebello (Palau-flagged tanker)
Operation Sankalp (2024)
Flags of Convenience (FOCs)
IMO (International Maritime Organization)
UNCLOS (UN Convention on the Law of the Sea)
Strait of Hormuz
Hellfire Missiles
U.S. Central Command (Centcom)
IOS Marine FZE (Ajman-registered)
3.5 Lakh Indian Seafarers Globally
✏ Probable Mains Questions
- "The killing of three Indian seafarers in the Gulf underscores the vulnerability of Indian labour in conflict zones and the limitations of diplomatic protest in the face of great-power military action." Discuss. (GS-2/GS-3, 250 words)
- Examine the role of Flags of Convenience (FOCs) in international shipping. How does the foreign-flag status of vessels limit India's ability to protect its seafarers? (GS-3, 150 words)
- Critically evaluate the effectiveness of international maritime law (IMO, UNCLOS) in protecting civilian crews during geopolitical conflicts. (GS-2, 250 words)
🎯 Practice MCQs
Prelims Q1
With reference to the recent U.S. missile attacks on merchant vessels in the Gulf, consider the following statements:
1. The U.S. Navy fired precision munitions on merchant vessels Marivex, Settebello, and Jahver, resulting in the death of three Indian seafarers aboard Settebello.
2. All three vessels were Indian-flagged ships, which gave India full legal jurisdiction to intervene militarily.
3. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has robust enforcement powers to prevent unilateral military action against merchant ships in conflict zones.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
📖 View Explanation
Statement 1 is correct ✓ — On June 8, 10, and 11, the U.S. Navy fired precision munitions on Marivex, Settebello, and Jahver. Three Indian seafarers (chief engineer, engine fitter, deck cadet) died onboard Settebello.
Statement 2 is incorrect ✗ — The vessels were NOT Indian-flagged. Settebello was Palau-flagged. The editorial explicitly discusses how the foreign-flag status limits India's options. India's ability to intervene is constrained because these vessels fall under the jurisdiction of their flag state.
Statement 3 is incorrect ✗ — The IMO is a UN agency that regulates technical, commercial, environmental, and safety aspects through consensus and rulemaking, but it has often fallen short in protecting ships and seafarers. The editorial states: "Quite often, national governments take unilateral action, and typical of a UN agency, the IMO has been unable to act to prevent or take remedial action." There is no overarching enforcement body.
Answer: (a) — 1 only
Statement 2 is incorrect ✗ — The vessels were NOT Indian-flagged. Settebello was Palau-flagged. The editorial explicitly discusses how the foreign-flag status limits India's options. India's ability to intervene is constrained because these vessels fall under the jurisdiction of their flag state.
Statement 3 is incorrect ✗ — The IMO is a UN agency that regulates technical, commercial, environmental, and safety aspects through consensus and rulemaking, but it has often fallen short in protecting ships and seafarers. The editorial states: "Quite often, national governments take unilateral action, and typical of a UN agency, the IMO has been unable to act to prevent or take remedial action." There is no overarching enforcement body.
Answer: (a) — 1 only
