logo
At UN, India stresses maritime, anti-terror strategy for national security

At UN, India stresses maritime, anti-terror strategy for national security

India told the UN Security Council that it views maritime security and countering terrorism as central to its national security and economic interests as it continues to evolve its strategy in response to new threats and geopolitical shifts in the Indo-Pacific region.
India, having a long coastline, extensive seafarer community, and capable maritime forces, is actively pursuing its role as a responsible maritime power to safeguard its interests and address emerging threats, India's Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish said Tuesday.
He was addressing the UNSC high-level open debate on Maintenance of international peace and security: Strengthening Maritime Security through International Cooperation for Global Stability' presided over by Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis under Greece's Presidency of the Council for the month of May.
"India views maritime security and countering terrorism as central to its national security and economic interests. Its approach balances robust defence capabilities, regional diplomacy, international cooperation and domestic infrastructure development. It continues to evolve its strategy in response to new threats and geopolitical shifts in the Indo-Pacific region, Harish said.
India underlined that maritime security is a cornerstone of economic growth as critical trade routes, energy supplies, and geopolitical interests are tied to the oceans.
Harish said that India's maritime security strategy is broad and multifaceted, addressing both traditional threats from state actors and non-traditional threats from piracy, contraband smuggling, illegal human migration, unreported and unregulated fishing, maritime incidents, hybrid threats and maritime terrorism.
He further said that India is committed to promoting a free, open and rules-based maritime order in accordance with the principles of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Furthering this objective, India is undertaking capacity-building efforts to tackle contemporary security challenges and strengthen maritime combat, strategy, and governance, he said.
UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, addressing the high-level debate, said the discussion underscores that the basic condition to preserve maritime security is the respect by all countries of the UN Charter and international law as reflected in UNCLOS.
Guterres said that over the years, the Security Council has sought to address a range of threats that undermine maritime security and global peace - from piracy, armed robbery, trafficking and organised crime to destructive acts against shipping, offshore installations and critical infrastructure and terrorism in the maritime domain. These, he said, pose significant threats to international security, global trade and economic stability.
Voicing concern that no region is spared, Guterres said the problem is getting worse. He said that after a modest global decrease in reported piracy and armed robbery incidents in 2024, the first quarter of 2025 saw a sharp upward reversal.
According to the International Maritime Organisation, reported incidents rose by nearly half, 47.5 per cent, compared to the same period in 2024.
Guterres noted that incidents in Asia nearly doubled, especially in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore.
In the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, attacks by the Houthis on commercial vessels have disrupted global trade and increased tensions in an already volatile region. The Gulf of Aden and the Mediterranean Sea remain treacherously active routes for migrant smuggling and the trafficking of weapons and human beings.
Heroin from Afghanistan continues to reach East Africa through the Indian Ocean. Cocaine moves through the coasts of the Western Hemisphere and across the Atlantic Ocean to West Africa and European ports.
Cyber-attacks are a fast-emerging security threat for ports and shipping companies. Facing these and other threats, the world's maritime routes and the people depending on them are sending a clear SOS, Guterres said.
Harish told the Council that over the last year, in response to shipping attacks and rising incidents of piracy in the Western Arabian Sea, the Indian Navy deployed more than 35 ships in the region, carried out more than 1,000 boarding operations and has responded to over 30 incidents.
The credible and swift actions of the Indian Navy saved more than 520 lives, irrespective of the nationality of the crew, he said.
The Indian Navy safely escorted over 312 merchant vessels, carrying over 11.9 million metric tonnes of cargo, valued at more than 5.3 billion dollars, he said, adding that India also actively engages in SAR (Search and Rescue) and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR), especially in the Indian Ocean Region.
Harish recalled that the importance of maritime security was highlighted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the first ever open debate on the topic held during India's Presidency of the Security Council in August 2021.
He reiterated the five basic principles that indicate the holistic manner of India's approach to maritime security - removal of barriers from legitimate maritime trade; peaceful settlement of disputes as per international law; jointly addressing natural disasters and maritime threats created by non-state actors; preservation of the marine environment and resources and encouragement of responsible maritime connectivity.
India believes that States should resolve disputes in the maritime security domain through peaceful means, including by adhering to pronouncements of international institutions that are established by a rules-based framework, Harish said, adding that inclusiveness and cooperation are key principles of India's maritime approach.
(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Masood Azhar for Peace? Priyanka Chaturvedi Rips Into UN Hypocrisy Over Pak's Counter-Terror Role
Masood Azhar for Peace? Priyanka Chaturvedi Rips Into UN Hypocrisy Over Pak's Counter-Terror Role

Time of India

time30 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Masood Azhar for Peace? Priyanka Chaturvedi Rips Into UN Hypocrisy Over Pak's Counter-Terror Role

Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Priyanka Chaturvedi delivered a powerful address on global inaction against terrorism, calling out Pakistan's role and the irony of its position on the UN Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Committee. Speaking in Berlin, Chaturvedi highlighted India's dual legacy — of peace from Mahatma Gandhi and Buddha, and of righteous resistance from Lord Krishna. She declared that India will not hesitate to fight terror in pursuit of justice. Taking a strong stand, she slammed Pakistan's hypocrisy, likening its appointment as vice-chair of the counter-terror panel to "making Masood Azhar a professor of global peace." Her remarks come in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor, as Indian leaders mount a diplomatic offensive abroad.#priyanka chaturvedi #shiv sena ubt #india pakistan #berlin speech #masood azhar #unsc vice chair #counter terrorism hypocrisy #pahalgam attack #operation sindoor #india fights terror #toi #toibharat #bharat #breakingnews #indianews Read More

Explained: International efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza
Explained: International efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza

Indian Express

time2 hours ago

  • Indian Express

Explained: International efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on Wednesday (June 4) failed to pass a resolution calling for 'an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza', after a veto by the United States, with all other members voting in favour. The death toll in Gaza has reached almost 55,000 as Israel has continued its renewed ground offensive, launched on May 17, in the Palestinian enclave. Also, the distribution of humanitarian aid, by a US- and Israel-backed NGO, in the Strip has been marred with chaos, confusion, and numerous shooting deaths. How have past international efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza fared? How have international views on Gaza changed over time? What explains Israel's actions? Between October 2023 (when the war began) and June 2025, international efforts to end Israel's war in Gaza focused on three principal fronts – a ceasefire, rebuilding Gaza, and the delivery of humanitarian aid. The objectives of diverse stakeholders across these efforts have all effectively failed. Efforts towards a ceasefire have been made both within and outside of the UN framework. At least seven UNSC Resolutions calling for a ceasefire in Gaza have failed, with Russia and China vetoing two, and the US vetoing five. The UNSC's March 2024 resolution calling for a ceasefire also failed due to Israeli rejections, despite Hamas acceptance. Hamas agreed to release hostages in exchange for Israel releasing Palestinian prisoners. Israel called the UN 'shameless', and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cancelled a then-scheduled trip to the Biden White House. The Trump White House, which prefers to work outside the UN framework, focused on implementing a three-phased ceasefire by January 2025. This too broke down by March, with Phase I only partially complete and Israel violating the agreement to resume operations in Gaza. Amidst ceasefire efforts, both the US and Arab stakeholders have also proposed long-term visions for rebuilding Gaza. For instance, President Donald Trump proposed a plan to forcefully displace Palestinians from Gaza to build a 'riviera'. The Arab League endorsed an Egyptian initiative to rebuild Gaza for Palestinians. While Israel and the US maintain maximalist positions, calling for a complete elimination of Hamas from Gaza, Arab states sidestep the long-term question, restricting their efforts to mediating a ceasefire. The 'Hamas question' has also become complicated, given its continued potency in Gaza, despite significant losses to Israeli action. Even before the October 2023 attack, the international community struggled to reconcile its acceptance of Hamas' position in Palestine as a legitimate actor with the condemnation of its use of terrorism. The effort to ensure humanitarian aid to Gaza's 2.1 million civilians — 100% of whom are on the brink of starvation according to the UN — has fallen disastrously short. Israel's complete rejection of the UN as a legitimate avenue has disabled aid delivery, especially since March. Israel banned the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine (UNRWA) last October, and both the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israeli settlers actively prevented most aid trucks from reaching designated destinations in Gaza, citing security risks vis-à-vis Hamas. Even when Israel did allow limited aid delivery in May, the UN deemed it insufficient for the scale of Gaza's humanitarian crisis. Rather, Israel prefers aid delivery with a heavily militarised approach, through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which the UN Secretary General has deemed incompatible with international law. First, the Trump administration's policy in the broader Middle East has been detrimental to Israel's stated interests. In the last three months, Washington has engaged with and legitimised Syria's Ahmed Al-Sharaa (who Israel opposes) and concluded a ceasefire with the Houthis in exchange for a cessation of attacks on international shipping (attacks on Israel and Israel-linked shipping have continued). The US also circumvented Israel entirely to negotiate directly with Hamas (in Qatar) for the release of an Israeli American hostage in May. The Trump administration has continued negotiations with Iran to potentially reach a nuclear deal — another policy anathema to Israel. Second, the critical position of Arab states (including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco which recognised Israel with the signing of the 2020 Abraham Accords) has hardened further as Israel expands its war. Israel also drew the ire of Arab states after it 'banned' a five-country Arab delegation (including Saudi Arabia and UAE) from visiting the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank in early June. Internationally, the Arab effort has focused on garnering greater recognition for the Palestinian state. Saudi Arabia, along with France, is set to jointly host a UN conference on the two-state solution later this month. Third, European states have grown increasingly critical of Israel, primarily due to Israel's blocking of aid delivery. In May, Canada, France, and the United Kingdom issued a rare and categorical rebuke of Israel's actions and committed to 'recognizing a Palestinian state as a contribution to achieving a two-state solution'. Both Israel and the US have warned European states against recognising Palestine, even as Spain, Norway, and Ireland formally recognised the State of Palestine on May 28. The evolution of the United Kingdom's position is a case in point. Compared to the UNSC's failed October 2023 resolution calling for a ceasefire, where the UK abstained, it now consistently votes in favour of such resolutions even without condemnations of Hamas. Explaining its June 2025 vote in favour, the UK deemed Israel's new operation 'unjustifiable, disproportionate and counterproductive'. The growing international (non-American) pressure has led Israel to expand and intensify its operations in Gaza (and settlement activity in the West Bank), rather than disabling them. For instance, a week prior to Trump's Middle East tour in May, the Israeli cabinet officially approved a plan to 'capture' Gaza and hold territory through an expanded operation (Op Gideon's Chariot). This operation in turn has cemented the failure of international efforts towards a ceasefire and aid delivery, and has been the key trigger for adverse international reactions towards Israel, and greater recognition of Palestinian sovereignty. Note that while US policy towards the Middle East has pushed against Israel's interests, Washington has compensated by backing Israeli actions in Palestine through continuing diplomatic and military support. 'Trump restrains Netanyahu's regional ambitions but gives him a free hand with the Palestinians,' Aluff Benn, the Editor in Chief of Israel's Haaretz newspaper recently said. Effectively, this has emboldened Netanyahu to push for Israel's indefinite occupation of Gaza. For Netanyahu, occupying Gaza is not a new objective to push back against mounting international pressure, but is rather a historic endeavour. In 2005, when Prime Minister Ariel Sharon withdrew Israel's illegal settlements from the Strip, Netanyahu had resigned from Sharon's government to oppose the move. That Israel has now been further emboldened was evident in Netanyahu declaring on Thursday (June 5) that Israel was arming a number of criminal gangs in Gaza to fight Hamas. This was the first such confirmation from the Israeli government and a tactic similar to Netanyahu's preference of tacitly 'partnering' with Hamas in past decades to undercut the possibility of a unified Palestinian leadership. As the IDF's recent call for over 400,000 reservists to active duty shows, Israel is gearing up towards a large-scale occupation of Gaza. For the current Israeli Prime Minister, the overt American support and the unwillingness of Arab and European states to sanction Israel or undertake substantial punitive measures are sufficient to press forward with occupation, and further disable the possibility of a Palestinian state. As is a recurring theme in Palestine, global support for Palestinian statehood occurs alongside Israel's physical erosion of its possibility.

Why Pakistan's Taliban Sanctions Panel Role At UNSC Is No Victory, Here's The Fine Print
Why Pakistan's Taliban Sanctions Panel Role At UNSC Is No Victory, Here's The Fine Print

News18

time4 hours ago

  • News18

Why Pakistan's Taliban Sanctions Panel Role At UNSC Is No Victory, Here's The Fine Print

Last Updated: While Pakistan will chair the UNSC Taliban Sanctions Committee, it is no victory for Islamabad - due to its poor record on terrorism - as it received far less than what it wanted. While Pakistan is set to chair the Taliban Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council in 2025, it failed to get what it wanted – to secure chairmanship of other UN Sanctions Committees – possibly due to its dismal record of keeping cross-border terrorism emanating from the country in check. Apart from chairing the UNSC Taliban Sanctions Committee, Pakistan will also be the vice-chair of the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the 15-nation UN body. According to a list of chairs of the subsidiary bodies of the UN Security Council, Denmark will chair the 1267 ISIL and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council, while Russia and Sierra Leone will be vice-chairs for 2025. However, Pakistan has actually received far less than what it wanted, given the world's doubts on Islamabad's credibility. For the first time in the history of the UN Security Council, the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Sanctions will have two co-chairs. Pakistan will co-chair the documentation IWG with Denmark and the Sanctions IWG with Greece. What Did Pakistan Want? Pakistan had demanded the 1267 Sanctions Committee; 1540 (Non-Proliferation) Sanctions Committee; 1988 (Taliban) Committee and Chair of the 1373 Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC), but only got the Taliban Sanctions Committee, much less than what it had wanted. Pakistan is also co-chairing the 1373 CTC, which is not very substantial and is merely ceremonial in nature. India had chaired the 1373 CTC in 2011 and in the committees require consensus of members, so the current allocation is far below the expectations of Pakistani leadership. In reality, the allocation has dealt a heavy blow to Pakistan, as its allocation remains far below its expectations despite sending a delegation – led by Bilawal Bhutto – to the UN, possibly due to its poor track record on cross-border terrorism. Despite failing to curb terrorism on its soil, Pakistan showed an uncompromising and undeserving attitude that delayed a consensus from being formed by six months, which greatly annoyed other UNSC members. India's Diplomatic Outreach India, which co-chaired the Counter Terrorism Committee in 2022, has consistently reminded the international community that Pakistan is host to the world's largest number of UN-proscribed terrorists and entities, including notorious terrorist Osama bin Laden, who was found and eliminated by American forces in Pakistan in 2011. In a big blow to Pakistan, Russia and Guyana – both sharing cordial ties with India – are vice-chairs in the Taliban Sanctions Committee, which will prevent Pakistan from gaining a free hand. Pakistan is also co-chairing two IWGs with Denmark and Greece, who are also friends with India. This means that India can use its diplomatic might and close partnership with friends in the Council to prevent Pakistan from making any adverse steps. Notably, India had also chaired the same 1988 (Taliban) Sanctions Committee during its UNSC 2021-22 term along with the Chair of the 1970 Libya Sanctions Committee. First Published: June 07, 2025, 15:20 IST

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store