&w=3840&q=100)
At UN, India stresses maritime, anti-terror strategy for national security
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.)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Brash US ambassador pick for Malayasia marks a turning point in diplomatic ties
President Donald Trump's pick to be the United States' next ambassador to Malaysia has raised more than a few eyebrows in the Southeast Asian nation. Right-wing influencer Nick Adams, a naturalised American born and raised in Australia, is, by his own account, a weightlifting, Bible-reading, 'wildly successful' and 'extremely charismatic' fan of Hooters and rare steaks, with the 'physique of a Greek God' and 'an IQ over 180.' Such brashness seems at odds with the usually more quiet business of diplomacy. The same could be said about Adams' lack of relevant experience, temperament and expressed opinions – which clash starkly with prevailing sentiment in majority-Muslim, socially conservative Malaysia. Whereas the US usually sends a career State Department official as ambassador to Malaysia, Adams is most definitely a 'political' nominee. His prior public service, as councilor, then deputy mayor, of a Sydney suburb ended abruptly in 2009 amid displays of undiplomatic temper. Yet far more problematic for his new posting is his past perceived disparaging of Islam and ardent pro-Israel views – lightning rod issues in a country that lacks diplomatic relations with Israel and whose population trends strongly pro-Palestinian. So it was little surprise when news of Adam's nomination on July 9, 2025, prompted angry pushback among the Malaysian public and politicians. Whether or not Malaysia would officially reject his appointment, assuming Adams is confirmed, remains uncertain, notwithstanding strong domestic pressure on Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to do so. But regardless, the nomination marks a turning point in US-Malaysian diplomatic relations, something I have been tracking for over 25 years. In my view, it communicates an overt US disregard for diplomatic norms, such as the signaling of respect and consideration for a partner state. It also reflects the decline in a relationship that for decades had been overwhelmingly stable and amicable. And all this may play into the hands of China, Washington's main rival for influence in Southeast Asia. Trump wedge in ties The US and Malaysia have largely enjoyed warm relations over the years, notwithstanding occasional rhetorical grandstanding, especially on the part of former longtime Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. Having successfully battled a communist insurgency during the mid-20th century, Malaysia remained reliably anti-communist throughout the Cold War, much to Washington's liking. Malaysia also occupies a strategically important position along the Strait of Malacca and has been an important source of both raw materials such as rubber and for the manufacturing of everything from latex gloves to semiconductors. In return, Malaysia has benefited both from the US security umbrella and robust trade and investment. But even before Trump's announcement of his ambassadorship pick, bilateral relations were tense. The most immediate cause was tariffs. In April, the US announced a tariff rate for Malaysia of 24%. Despite efforts to negotiate, the Trump administration indicated the rate would increase further to 25% should no deal materialise by August 1. That the White House released its revised tariff rate just two days before announcing Adams' nomination – and just over a month after Ibrahim held apparently cordial discussions with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore – only added to Malaysia's grievance. Malaysia may reap some benefit from the new US trade policy, should Trump's broader agenda results in supply chains bypassing China in favor of Southeast Asia, and investors seek new outlets amid Trump's targeted feuds. But Malaysia's roughly US$25 billion trade surplus with the U.S., its preference for ' low-profile functionality ' in regard to its relationship with the U.S., and the general volatility of economic conditions, leave Malaysia still vulnerable. Moreover, trade policy sticking points for the US include areas where Malaysia is loath to bend, such as in its convoluted regulations for halal certification and preferential policies favoring the Malay majority that have long hindered trade negotiations between the two countries. End of the student pipeline The punishing tariffs the White House has threatened leave Malaysia in a bind. The US is Malaysia's biggest investor and lags only China and Singapore in volume of trade. As such, the government in Kuala Lumpur may have little choice but to sacrifice domestic approval to economic expediency. Nor is trade the only source of angst. The White House's pressure on American institutions of higher education is effecting collateral damage on a host of its ostensible allies, Malaysia included. Although numbers have declined since the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s, the US has remained a popular destination for Malaysians seeking education abroad. In the 1980s, over 10,000 Malaysians enrolled in US colleges and universities annually. Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, numbers stabilised at around 8,000. But after, enrollments struggled to recover – reaching only 5,223 in 2024. Now, they are falling anew. In the first Trump administration, the visa approval rate for Malaysian students remained high despite Trump's 'Muslim ban' exacerbating impressions of an unwelcoming environment or difficult process. Now, economic uncertainty from trade wars and a struggling Malaysian currency, coupled with proliferating alternatives, make the comparatively high expense of studying in the U.S. even more of a deterrent. Yet what propelled Anwar's administration to announce that it will no longer send government-funded scholarship students to the US – a key conduit for top students to pursue degrees overseas – was specifically the risks inherent in Trump's policies, including threats to bar foreign students at certain universities and stepped-up social media screening of visa applicants. Looking beyond a US-led order Clearly, Malaysia's government believes that deteriorating relations with the US are not in its best interests. Yet as the junior partner in the relationship, Malaysia has limited ability to improve them. In that, Kuala Lumpur has found itself in a similar boat to other countries in the region who are likewise reconsidering their strategic relationship with the United States amid Trump 2.0's dramatic reconfiguration of American foreign policy priorities. When sparring with China for influence in Southeast Asia, the US has, until recently, propounded norms of a Western-centric ' liberal international order' in the region – promoting such values as openness to trade and investment, secure sovereignty and respect for international law. Malaysia has accepted, and benefited from, that framework, even as it has pushed back against U.S. positions on the Middle East and, in the past, on issues related to human rights and civil liberties. But amid the Trump administration's unpredictability in upholding this status quo, a small, middle-income state like Malaysia may have little option beyond pursuing a more determinedly nonaligned neutrality and strategic pragmatism. Indeed, as the US sheds its focus on such priorities as democracy and human rights, China's proffered ' community with a shared future ', emphasising common interests and a harmonious neighborhood, cannot help but seem more appealing. This is true even while Malaysia recognises the limitations to China's approach, too, and resists being pushed to 'pick sides'. Malaysia is, after all, loath to be part of a sphere of influence dominated by China, especially amid ongoing antagonism over China's claims in the South China Sea – something that drives Malaysia and fellow counterclaimants in Southeast Asia toward security cooperation with the US. That said, Anwar's administration seemed already to be drifting toward China and away from the West even before the latest unfriendly developments emanating from Washington. This includes announcing in June 2024 its plan to join the BRICS economic bloc of low- and middle-income nations. Burning bridges Now, the more bridges the US burns, the less of a path it leaves back to the heady aspirations of the first Trump administration's ' Free and Open Indo-Pacific' framework, which had highlighted the mutual benefit it enjoyed and shared principles it held with allies in Asia. Instead, Malaysia's plight exemplifies what a baldly transactional and one-sided approach produces in practice. As one ruling-coalition member of parliament recently described, Adams would be the rare US ambassador with whom Malaysian politicians would be loath to pose for photos. And that fact alone speaks volumes about diplomacy and evolving global strategic realities in the MAGA era.
Hindustan Times
6 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
AI in the military: Legal framework
As India pushes forward in its efforts to become an ethical and strategic leader in military Artificial Intelligence (AI), it is important to evaluate where we stand globally. In an earlier article, we looked at how India rolled out frameworks like DRDO's ETAI and the large-scale IndiaAI Mission, laying the groundwork for responsible, transparent, and effective adoption of AI in defence. We also saw the pressing need to turn robust paper policies into real-world practice, moving beyond agency silos to coordinated ethical governance. Representational Image(Pixabay) Globally, the debate surrounding AI in military has moved beyond just innovation. It is now focussed on ethics, rules, and trust. Whether it is NATO capitals, G7 forums, Pentagon briefings, or United Nations (UN) meetings, countries find themselves returning to the same fundamental questions: Who is responsible, how will human oversight be exercised, and how do we ensure AI systems are reliable, explainable, and accountable? Within NATO, member-States signed onto six guiding principles for responsible use of AI in defence in 2021 (revised in 2024)—including strict commitments to lawfulness, responsibility and accountability, explainability and traceability, reliability, governability and bias mitigation. These were homegrown concerns, not imposed externally. The US formalised its Ethical Principles for AI in 2020, after extensive input from civil society and industry. Its five central values—responsibility, equity, traceability, reliability, and governability—are now built into procurement and deployment at every level. Traceability, for example, means not just tracking how an AI arrived at a decision but equipping commanders to actually understand those decisions on the battlefield. Governability makes sure that, at any sign of AI going rogue, humans retain a reliable way to step in and shut it down. All of these principles, while guided by ethics, are enforced by contracts, project reviews, and documented audits. The UN, too, has taken up the call. Since 2016, the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS) has debated possible new rules for weapons that can select and engage targets on their own. While a treaty still has not emerged, the GGE did settle on eleven guiding principles in 2019: international humanitarian law must apply to all weapon systems, and meaningful human control and legal accountability are non-negotiable. India's voice in these talks has always been balanced and pragmatic. Instead of supporting a total ban on autonomous weapons, India has argued that we should judge any technology by its real use and impact, not just whether it is autonomous. Indian representatives have also highlighted a basic issue: There is no universally accepted definition of lethal autonomous weapons, so a rigid treaty now might be premature. Turning to Europe, the EU recently enacted a legislation for regulating AI with requirements based on risk levels. It is expected to set a global standard for AI governance, similar to how the EU's General Data Privacy Regulations (GDPR) influenced data privacy worldwide. Defence, though, is a carve-out: Article 2(3) says the law does not apply to AI systems created purely for military or national security purposes. Back home, India's approach is still young but moving in the right direction. The Defence AI Council (DAIC) and the Defence AI Project Agency (DAIPA) have accelerated efforts to bring trustworthy AI into the services. The DRDO's ETAI Framework sets out clear rules: reliability, safety, transparency, fairness, and privacy. These principles guide how AI is built, tested, and used, echoing the values articulated by NITI Aayog around accountability and inclusivity. Despite having strong institutional backing, though, enforcement is still mostly through internal standards and practices and not legislation. That said, India is not alone in this approach. The US weaves ethical principles into acquisition and contracts; NATO builds AI testing and validation boards; the EU formalises principles into law (though mostly for non-military uses). India has all the right institutions—MeitY, DRDO, DAIC—but needs to take the next step from policy to enforceability. Looking ahead, India can seize three opportunities. First, embed ethical principles into procurement and deployment protocols for all military AI systems. Second, create a permanent AI inter-agency commission with representation from all key stakeholders like the armed forces, DRDO, MeitY, and legal experts. Third, stay deeply involved in shaping global standards; not only from the perspective of protecting its own interests, but to help set them. In a world where civilian and military AI are intrinsically linked, and capabilities are evolving fast, it is simply not enough to try to regulate after the fact. India has the chance to lead with a robust, clear, and enforceable framework that balances security with ethics. In the new era of military AI, trust, transparency, and clear rules are not limiting, they are the true sources of strategic strength. This article is authored by Zain Pandit, partner and Aashna Nahar, associate, JSA Advocates and Solicitors.
Indian Express
14 hours ago
- Indian Express
‘Damage is done': Fareed Zakaria on worsening India-US relations under Trump 2.0
The decision by US President Donald Trump's administration to penalize India for buying Russian oil while finalising oil deal with Pakistan has led to trust deficit in New Delhi and it could act as a turning point in the relations between the United States and India, said journalist Fareed Zakaria in one his take on CNN. In one of his analyses on 'biggest foreign policy mistake by Trump 2.0', Zakaria said that the US strategic outreach towards India has been in a bipartisan manner over the past 25 years but the carefully built diplomatic progress has been 'undone' in a few weeks by Trump 2.0, while arguing that Delhi may begin to distance itself from Washington and recheck its global alliances which has become multi-aligned under PM Narendra Modi's leadership. During his segment on CNN, Zakaria said 'Indians believe that America has shown its true colors, its unreliable, its willingness to be brutal to those it calls its friends. They will understandably feel that they need to hedge their bets. Stay close to Russia, and even make amends with China.' Zakaria said that India, which has followed the policy of nonalignment for a long period, came close to the United States in over last two decades, with a landmark visit by former President Bill Clinton in 2000, followed by George W Bush administration recognising India to be treated with the likes of great power like Britain, France and China and signing a historic nuclear deal under former PM Manmohan Singh. Zakaria added that former President Barack Obama's pivot to Asia and his administration's bid to support India to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council also marked a turning point in the two countries' relations. Detailing about Trump's first tenure and Joe Biden's presidency, Zakaria said, 'Trump also embraced and promoted his personal relationship with Prime Minister Modi. President Biden built on the Trump legacy, forging greater cooperation in defense and economics. India began planning to cooperate with the US in the manufacture of everything from fighter jets to computer chips.' But the efforts have been 'undone' and the trajectory of a camaraderie between New Delhi and Washington have been reversed in Trump 2.0, feels Zakaria. According to him, now even if the Trump administration tries a course correction, the 'damage is done'.
