U.S. Navy Office of Naval Intelligence Threat to Shipping (WTS) Report, 5 April - 3 May 2023

U.S. Navy Office of Naval I... by lawofsea

U.S. Navy Office of Naval Intelligence Worldwide Threat to Shipping (WTS) for 5 May - 2 June 2021

U.S. Navy Office of Naval I... by lawofsea

U.S. Navy Office of Naval Intelligence Worldwide Threat to Shipping (WTS) for 14 May - 10 June 2020 and HORN OF AFRICA/GULF OF GUINEA/SOUTHEAST ASIA Weekly Piracy Update for 4 - 10 June 2020

U.S. Navy Office of Naval I... by lawofsea on Scribd

U.S. Navy Office of Naval I... by lawofsea on Scribd

U.S. Navy Office of Naval Intelligence Worldwide Threat to Shipping (WTS) for 7 May - 3 June 2020

U.S. Navy Office of Naval I... by lawofsea on Scribd

U.S. Navy Office of Naval Intelligence Worldwide Threat to Shipping (WTS) for 23 January 2020 to 26 February 2020 and HORN OF AFRICA/GULF OF GUINEA/SOUTHEAST ASIA Weekly Piracy Update for 20- 26 February 2020

U.S. Navy Office of Naval I... by lawofsea on Scribd

U.S. Navy Office of Naval I... by lawofsea on Scribd

India Finally Acquits Private Security Contractors

Indian court acquits 35 from anti-piracy ship of weapons charges reports The Japan Times

Thirty-five men being held in India were on Monday acquitted of illegal possession of arms while they were on a U.S.-operated anti-piracy ship in 2013.

The six Britons, three Ukrainians, 14 Estonians and 12 Indians were

given five-year jail sentences by a lower court in southern India’s Tamil Nadu state in January last year.

The Indian coast guard intercepted the privately run MV Seaman Guard Ohio off the coast of Tuticorin in Tamil Nadu in October 2013.

Semi-automatic weapons and thousands of rounds of ammunition were found.

The crew members were charged with not having proper paperwork to carry weapons in Indian waters, but India has faced intense diplomatic pressure over the case ever since.

R. Subramaniya Adityan, a lawyer for 19 of the crew, said after Monday’s hearing at the Madras High Court that the men “will be released after the court order reaches the prison officials on Tuesday.”

One of the risks of private security company (PSC) anti-piracy units is having to deal with the laws of the various states through whose waters ships carrying the PSC must transit. Especially those states very sensitive about threats posed by units of armed, well-trained men.

That being said, four years is a long time to deal with what should have been a matter easily disposed of.

Background here

An Odd Iran -India Confrontation

Oil spill and arrest or bold international governmental hijacking?

Maritime Bulletin reports that India accused Iran of hijacking Indian suezmax tanker Desh Shanti, but there might be more to the story:

Indian crude oil tanker Desh Shanti was reported on Aug 6 13 dumping oil into the sea near Iran waters.

On August 15 the story got a new twist, developing into an international scandal.

India accused Iran in actually, hijacking Indian suezmax tanker under a pretext of oil pollution. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) detained Desh Shanti in international waters and according to The Times of India, is escorting tanker to Bandar Abbas.

 Desh Shanti ( shipspotting.com)

As of 01:30 UTC Aug 15 vessel according to AIS, was sailing in Persian Gulf towards Hormuz Strait, off Iran inner waters, abeam of Bandar-e Kangan, Iran, some 300 nautical miles to go to Bandar Abbas. Initially, tanker loaded with Iraq crude oil was en route from Iraq to India.
Indian authorities claim arrest is some kind of political gesture to express Iranian dissatisfaction with Indian recent cut in import of Iranian oil, as a fallout of sanctions imposed by the US and the EU.

Times of India report here:

For India, it is not far-fetched to draw the conclusion that Tehran is peeved with India's rising crude imports from Iraq and that the seizure of the ship may be a way of showing its displeasure. But this doesn't just have consequences for India-Iran ties but also internationally, as it will raise questions about what Tehran intends to do in the Persian Gulf where it has even threatened use of force in the past to show its influence in the oil trade.

A news report from 6 Aug 13 on allegations the ship was "dumping" oil here:

Bahrain is on “high alert” following an oil spill in the Arabian Gulf, also called the Persian Gulf, which authorities say was deliberately caused by an Indian ship.

The Indian-flagged crude oil tanker Desh Shanti was caught dumping oil near Iranian waters on Tuesday after ignoring official communications from concerned authorities, says a report in the “Gulf Daily News.”

Commissioned in 2004, the Desh Shanti is a 158,030 tonne oil tanker managed by the Shipping Corporation of India, Ltd., a government of India enterprise.

The spill caused an oil slick 10 miles long, according to the Marine Emergency Mutual Aid Centre, a regional intergovernmental organization based in Bahrain.

No explanation is provided as to why a ship loaded with valuable crude oil would release a portion of its cargo off Iran instead of carrying it all the way to its destination. There seem to be few, if any, reports of communications by the ship to report a problem.

So, perhaps, the ship, through some sort of accident, put oil in the water. Or, perhaps, the Iranians did something to the ship to put oil in the water.

 Or, perhaps, there are even less fruitful avenues of idle speculation for me to follow.

Keeping an eye on this.

India's Navy: The Indian Carrier

Eric Wertheim, who edits the U.S. Naval Institute's Combat Fleets of the World , discusses some ramifications of India's fleet growth:

Let me express my condolences to the Indian Navy (and the families affected) on the loss of its sailors in the recent submarine explosion and fire. It is a sad reminder that sea service is a high risk profession.

Asia Alignments: "India Backs Japan on Maritime Security"

The Times of India reports India backs Japan on maritime security to fend off China:

"There can be little doubt that countries like India and Japan must cooperate in ensuring the security of the global commons including freedom of navigation on the high seas that is critical to both our countries which import large amounts of oil and gas."Let me say clearly today that India stands with Japan, and other like-minded countries, in pursuing and implementing these goals and objectives," Khurshid said during a speech at the Rikkyo University in Tokyo earlier this week.

Japan has been involved in a dispute with China on the East China Sea, while this week Beijing's naval patrols off Malaysia and Brunei have raised concerns there as well. India retains commercial interests in South China Sea, but may come up against China's aggressive patrolling there too.

Elephants dancing.

Southeast Asia: India, China and Sea Power

Interesting piece at the Foreign Policy website, "India's Ocean" by Dhruva Jaishankar, posing one of those fundamental questions, "What is the role of the Indian Navy as China asserts dominance to India's east?":

For its part, China needs to appreciate that its aggressive pursuit of maritime territory compels India to cooperate more closely with Vietnam and the Philippines. Beijing's issuing of passports this November featuring a map showing the fullest extent of its territorial claims was a remarkably clumsy gesture, provoking simultaneous outrage in India, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Taiwan. China may have only itself to blame if these states find greater common cause with one another, and with other regional maritime powers.

The map above indicates key Chinese sea lines of communication. You might take note of India's position relative to them.

You also might take a look at the Thomas X. Hammes piece, Offshore Control: A Proposed Strategy for an Unlikely Conflict (pdf), which suggests a "distant blockade" (or "Offshore Control") of China as a possible strategy:

The strategy of Offshore Control works with willing Asia-Pacific nations to ensure that the United States can interdict China’s energy and raw material imports and industrial exports, while protecting our partners.

Col. Hammes's thoughts are also set out in December 2012 U.S. Naval Institute article, "Offshore Control is the Answer":

Offshore control would deny China the use of the sea inside the first island chain, at the same time defend those islands, and dominate the air and sea outside that theater. It envisions a stand-off military campaign focusing on a war of economic strangulation rather than on penetrating Chinese airspace to physically destroy its infrastructure. It seeks to force China to fight in ways that maximize U.S. strengths while minimizing China’s. In essence, OC provides a strategic context for an operational approach that goes beyond Air-Sea Battle to use the U.S. geographical advantage to maximize the effectiveness of a campaign using our air, sea, and land assets.

Oh, and if you were wondering about the value of a strong U.S. Navy - this discussion is right on point. Being able to project power even when it needs to be done without local help - that's a big chunk of the Navy's job description.

Keep in mind that it is the job of the military strategist to work through "unlikely" scenarios just in case. Next time some idiot media hack reports on secret U.S. plans to re-take Midway Island based upon some outlandish event occurrence, it shouldn't really be a shock to you.

UPDATE: There has been some notice of the fact I used an "oil flow" map to illustrate this post. Here is a more recent map that shows vital sea lanes (click on it to enlarge), followed up by a closer view in the China region:

South China Sea: China's Activity - Vietnam calls it "sabotage"

With tip of the hat to Walter Russell Mead Chinese Sabotage in the South China Sea, it's off to the Chinese "Bad Neighbor Policy" or, perhaps, the "Chinese Big Ugly Stick Policy."

See Vietnam accuses China of maritime sabotage and this Reuters piece, . From the latter:

Vietnam's condemnation came a day after its state oil and gas company, Petrovietnam, accused Chinese boats of sabotaging an exploration operation by cutting a seismic cable being towed behind a Vietnamese boat.

Vietnam's Foreign Ministry spokesman condemned the cable cutting as well as some recent Chinese provincial regulations that identified the disputed Spratly and Paracel islands as Chinese, and a map that did the same thing.

"The actions of the Chinese side have seriously violated Vietnam's sovereignty over the two archipelagos," the spokesman, Luong Thanh Nghi, said in a statement.
***
India has also declared itself ready to deploy naval vessels to the South China Sea to protect its oil-exploration interests there, a new source of tension in a disputed area where fears of conflict have been growing steadily.

Indian navy chief, Admiral D.K Joshi, said on Monday that, while India was not a territorial claimant in the South China Sea, it was prepared to act, if necessary, to protect its maritime and economic interests in the region.

"When the requirement is there, for example, in situations where our country's interests are involved, for example ONGC ... we will be required to go there and we are prepared for that," Joshi told a news conference.

CDR Salamander has a post on the potential Indian deployment here.

Something else to keep and eye on.

India Moves to Protect Vital Sea Lane

Naval base to open 31 July:

Aiming to keep an eye on maritime security around the Malacca Straits, a key sea trading route, the Indian Navy will inaugurate a new air base at the southern-most tip of Andaman and Nicobar Islands.

As you can see from the adjacent map (with the Andaman and Nicobar Islands circled) it's a vital location for maritime security in the region.

More at Defence Express:

The Indian Air Force (IAF) has already tried out its potent frontline Sukhoi SU-30 fighter jets from air bases in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The Shibpur airstrip in north Andamans is also planned to be extended from 3,200 feet to 12,000 feet to support all types of aircraft and night-flying operations. Moreover, new airstrips will come up at Kamorta and Little Andaman, while the existing two main runways at Port Blair and Car Nicobar are also being upgraded to facilitate fighter jet, helicopter and heavy transport plane operations. The plans will be implemented in the next few years.

“Plans are afoot to turn Campbell Bay into ‘Operational Turn-Around Bases’ with better refuelling and communication facilities and augmented force levels,” sources added.

And yet more at
"India Now Commands The Strait Of Malacca With Naval Base 'INS Baaz' ":

Great Nicobar Island, Campbell Bay Circled

The southern most islands of India are closer to Indonesia than mainland India and will help India gain strategic supremacy in the region. The new base will also boast of an upgraded air base that will be able to operate the newly inducted Hercules C-130J Super Hercules which are meant for special forces' operations.

INS Baaz clearly overlooks the Strait of Malacca from across the Aceh in Indonesia. With this new addition to the already powerful Indian navy, India can kickstart operations if maritime activities in the region are threatened. The Strait of Malacca were once heavily infected with piravy but now the Indian and Indonesian navies monitor it for criminal activities by jointly patrolling their maritime borders.

Runway at Campbell Bay, about 3000 feet long

This new base of the Indian Navy comes at a time when the US is re-balancing its force levels from the Atlantic to Asia-Pacific and will base at least 60% of its naval assets in the Asia-Pacific region. The Strait of Malacca acts as a key link between the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean connecting Asia and Africa to East Asia, Australia and the US.

The Indian Navy already operates bases at Port Blair and Car Nicobar in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands chain. INS Baaz is 300 nautical miles south of Car Nicobar naval base and has given the Indian Navy a much wider reach to effectively deter any aggression in the region.

India's Naval Growth

Conceptual view of INS Vikramaditya

There's a lot of discussion about China's naval programs and the prospect of s Chinese aircraft carrier taking to the seas sometime in the near future.

One Asian navy already operates a carrier, has trained carrier qualified pilots and a plan to grow its fleet by adding 50 modern ships to its force with a few years, including more carriers. Its goal is to have three operational carrier battle groups.

A summary report from NDTV on "How Indian Navy is expanding and modernising":

According to the report of the Standing Committee on Defence, tabled in Parliament in the last week of April, the Navy's short-term plan has the following objectives:

- Augment airborne maritime surveillance, strike, Anti-Submarine Warfare and air defence capability through induction of shore-based aircraft, integral helos, carrier based aircraft, space based AIS and UAVs, along with suitable weapons and sensors.

- Develop ASW (anti-submarine warfare) capability through induction of suitable platforms, weapons and sensors.

INS Viraat

- Build adequate standoff capability for sea lift and Expeditionary Operations to achieve desired power projection force levels, influence events ashore and undertake Military Operations Other Than War.

- Induct assets and develop suitable infrastructure to augment forces available for Low Intensity Maritime OperaINS Vtions (LIMO), protection of off- shore assets and Coastal Security framework.

- Induct force multipliers like satellite based global communications, reconnaissance and network enabled platforms to achieve Battle-Space dominance capability and perform network centric operations.

- Induct state-of-the-art equipment and specialised platforms for Special Forces to enhance niche capabilities to conduct Maritime Intervention Operations and other envisaged roles.

- Develop support infrastructure in island territories to support the planned force levels as well as support infrastructure for ships/submarines/aircrafts at ports and airbases.
***
Given the extensive plans presented to the Parliament, it is evident now that the Indian Navy is in the middle of its most ambitious expansion plan in the past three decades. Senior officers point out that the Indian Navy's perspective-planning in terms of 'force-levels' is now driven by a conceptual shift from 'numbers' of platforms - that is, from the old 'bean-counting' philosophy - to one that concentrates on 'capabilities'.

Naval headquarters says 50 modern ships are currently on order with majority being built in Indian shipyards. . .
***

INS Shivalik

Two stealth ships - INS Shivalik and INS Satpura - commissioned recently have been designed and built by public sector Mazgaon Docks Limited. The order books of India's oldest government-owned shipbuilders are full with the Navy wanting four more such guided missile frigates over the next five years.

There are more acquisitions in the pipeline. They include: four anti-submarine corvettes, four guided missile destroyers, three stealth frigates, six Scorpene submarines (being built at Mazgaon Docks with French technology and help) and two nuclear-powered submarines.

India's conventional diesel-powered submarine fleet is down to single digits right now but with the Russian-built Nerpa class nuclear submarine (leased for a decade) joining service earlier this year, the submarine arm has got a major boost. But the biggest force accretion in recent years has come in the form of Boeing Pi-8long range maritime reconnaissance (LRMR) plane that gives the Indian Navy a reach and capability to mount surveillance way beyond its traditional areas of influence.
***
According to its near-term plans, the Indian Navy has ambitions to become a three Battle Carrier Groups force by 2020.

While it's most prestigious acquisition-Russian Aircraft Carrier Admiral Gorshkov, to be renamed INS Vikramaditya - is likely to be inducted into the fleet latest by March 2013, one more carrier being built indigenously will most likely join the service by 2015.

Indian MiG-29

Currently India operates a lone Aircraft Carrier, INS Viraat, a British-built 1960s vintage ship that is on an extended lease of life thanks to the Navy's innovative engineers and planners.

Vikramaditya, once inducted, will give India the much needed edge in its maritime capabilities since it will come with the latest MiG-29 K series of aircraft. Indian Naval Aviators are already hard at work training themselves on the planes but away from the ship

MiG-29 photo from here.

Some Countries Offering "Insurance" Money for Evading the Iranian Sanctions

Short report from PennEnergy on a couple of countries offering "insurance" money to support tankers which evade economic sanctions against Iran at India offers $50MM in coverage for Iranian tanker runs:

Indian oil transportation companies will be able to receive some limited coverage from the government for oil tankers making trips to Iran, according to Reuters. The recent sanctions imposed against Iran for its continuing efforts to develop its nuclear program, and as many Western nations fear nuclear weapons, have largely prevented Indian oil companies from finding insurance for their oil ships.
***
In response, the Indian government has offered to insure as much as $50 million for any "Indian flag carriers" traveling to Iran. This amount falls well short of the actual liability incurred by oil tankers on any given trip, but it comes to more than six times as much as the Japanese government has offered its companies, illustrating India's interest in continuing the flow of Iranian oil.

Insurance Insight provides some background:

The concern for Asian nations such as India, China and Japan has been that their ships, which are highly dependent on the International Group of Protection & Indemnity Clubs and its reinsurance programme, will be unable to sail if they cannot obtain cover.

Another Insurance Insight report on limitations placed by Japanese insurers on tankers carrying Iranian crude:

Japanese oil buyers will be forced to coordinate schedules after insurers warned they will cover only one tanker transporting Iranian oil at a time after the 1 July sanctions deadline.
***
According to Reuters, the three insurers together can provide only up to ¥30bn ($370m) at one time in hull and machinery cover, which protects vessels against physical damage, without relying on the European reinsurance market to hedge the risk.

This is enough to cover insurance for only one tanker travelling in the Gulf with Iranian crude oil, Insurance Insight understands.

So, India and Japan as "sanction busters?"

Earlier report here, where China is added to the list of Iranian oil carriers.

Indian Ocean Mistake: Armed Guards on Italian Cargo Ship Shoot at Fishermen, Kill 2

Worst case scenario for armed guards on merchant ship, reported as Italian ship fires on fishing boat mistaking it for pirate vessel, killing 2 Indian fishermen:

An Italian cargo ship fired at an Indian fishing boat that it mistook for a pirate vessel, killing two fishermen, India’s navy said Thursday.

The ship identified as the Enrica Lexie fired at the fishermen in waters off India’s southern Kerala state on Wednesday, a navy statement said.

The Indian coast guard and navy vessels escorted the Italian ship to the nearby port city of Kochi and were questioning the captain and crew.

The owner of the fishing vessel, who goes by the single name Freddy, said Thursday the firing was unprovoked. The boat was fishing when the ship opened fire, killing the two fishermen instantly, he said.

The incident reportedly occurred 40 miles off the Indian coast.

More from here:

India on Thursday summoned the Italian envoy and voiced concern over the killing of two fishermen by security officials of the Italian cargo vessel and underlined that the captain of the ship should cooperate with local authorities.

M Ganapathi, secretary (west) in the external affairs ministry, met Italian ambassador Giacomo Sanfelice di Montefort and told him that the captain has to cooperate with Indian officials probing the incident.

The captain of Enrica Lexie, who has been ordered to anchor near a local port, told officials the fishermen were mistaken for pirates after they sailed close to the tanker in a motorised boat, navy spokesman Roy Francis said.

"The security wing fired at the fishermen and the captain has alerted the coast guard about the firing. We are making a detailed investigation," the naval spokesman said.
***
Freddie Louis, who owns the Indian fishing vessel, said gunmen on board the tanker fired at the boat "without provocation," killing the two unarmed men aged 50 and 21.

The boat with 11 men had sailed out to trawl for tuna fish on February 7.

"We were returning after the fishing and all of us were were sleeping except Valentine and Pinki," Louis told AFP, identifying the victims by their first names.

One report has the armed guards as being "Italian navy personnel."

ShipSpotting.com

Enrica Lexie

© Nathan

This type of event has been much discussed in concerns over placing armed security teams on merchant ships, with liability and control over the guards being major issues.

UPDATE: An interesting legal question arises about what law will apply to this shooting and that may turn on the location ship when the shooting occurred. Did this incident occur in Indian waters or on the "high seas?"

UPDATE2 (19 Feb 12): Italian guards now in Indian custody as reported here. India has has custody of the guards, the Italian government asserts that a trial, if any, should occur in Italy:

The Italian government maintains the case should be handled by its own judicial authorities “since the deeds happened in international waters on an Italian-flagged ship,” the statement said. The Italians contend that the presence of military personnel aboard the cargo ship is governed by an Italian law conforming to U.N. anti-piracy resolutions, and that such personnel are part of the Italian state and thus immune to the jurisdiction of foreign states.

The law on this is unclear - and this aspect of the matter properly is now less a legal issue than a diplomatic one.

Somali Pirates: Convoy Coordination India, China and Japan

Reported as India, China, Japan coordinating in anti-piracy operations :

China and Japan have started implementing a new mechanism to coordinate the movement of their warships in the Gulf of Aden to provide protection to cargo vessels from sea brigands, Press Trust of India (PTI) reported.

The three countries operate independently in the Gulf of Aden to provide protection to cargo ships from pirates and are not part of the two groupings deployed there– the European EUNAVFOR and the US-led Task Force 151.

“Earlier what was happening was that the convoys of all these three countries would be spaced by few hours and there would be long hours in a day when no convoy was available for escorting the vessels,” Indian Navy’s Assistant Chief of Naval Staff (Foreign Cooperation and Naval Intelligence) Rear Admiral Monty Khanna told reporters here.
***
He said now the three countries have “evolved a mechanism under which it will be ensured that there is enough gap between the Indian, Chinese and the Japanese convoy and they are well-displaced” to be able to escort a greater number of ships in a day.

Good.

UK Rules for Private Armed Guards on British Merchant Shipping Revealed

Rules and concerns expressed here:

The guidelines stipulate that ship owners should include certain factors in a risk assessment motivate for selecting a private security company (PSC). Shipping companies wishing to use armed guards will also be required to submit a detailed counter-piracy plan to the UK Department for Transport in advance.

No word on the number of bullets that will be allowed each armed guard - Barney "One Bullet" Fife or Rambo-style.

Based on recent events in India, as reported here, a strict count of bullets might be important.

Rambo may have trouble with that.

India and Pakistan: Water War May Go Nuclear?

Indus River Basin (from U.S. Senate report)

Interesting link up from Oilprice.com to an editorial in a Pakistani newspaper in John Daly's Pakistani Editorial Says Nuclear War with India "Inevitable" as Water Dispute Continues:

Every now and again, one reads an editorial that stops the reader in his tracks.

On 8 December, with the headline "War Inevitable To Tackle Indian Water Aggression," Pakistan’s Urdu-language Nawa-e Waqt, issued such a screed.

Nawa-e Waqt bluntly commented on India’s Kashmiri water polices and Islamabad’s failure up to now to stop New Delhi’s efforts to construct hydroelectric dams in Kashmir, “India should be forcibly prevented from constructing these dams. If it fails to constrain itself, we should not hesitate in launching nuclear war because there is no solution except this.”

Read it all.

It seems that India is building dams in Kashmir that may allow it to control the flow of water through Pakistan - water vital to Pakistan's agricultural survival. The Pakistanis take exception to having their fate lie on the hands on some flow control wheel on Indian dams. Daly reports:

Bashir Ahmad, a geologist in Srinagar, Kashmir commented grimly about the Indians’ future intentions, “They will switch the Indus off to make Pakistan solely dependent on India. It’s going to be a water bomb.”

As noted in the Oilprice.com article, Afghanistan is also looking to build dams on the Kabul River, which also would impact Pakistan. India is reported to be supporting these dams. The effect is to make the Pakistanis even less comfortable.

The U.S. Senate report, "AVOIDING WATER WARS: WATER SCARCITY AND CENTRAL ASIA’S GROWING IMPORTANCE FOR STABILITY IN AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN" can be downloaded here:

Of all the rivers flowing into Pakistan, the Indus is the most essential because of its importance to the agricultural sector. Pakistan’s agriculture relies on the world’s largest contiguous irrigation system fed by the Indus waters; in fact, water withdrawals for agricultural irrigation represent almost 97 percent of all withdrawals in Pakistan. This irrigation network covers an estimated 83 percent of cultivated land in the country and contributes to nearly a quarter of its gross domestic product.

Water. Can't live without it. Might go to war over it. One of those "national survival" threats.

Mystery Iranian Ship Off India Draws Protest

Reported as Concerns grow over armed Iranian ship: (emphasis added)

Arrow points to Lakshadweep Islands

A mysterious Iranian ship, anchored for close to 30 days near Lakshadweep, has become a major cause of concerns for the government and coastal security agencies.
***

The ship has been anchored there for over a month and so far Iran has given no explanation to Indian authorities in this regard. The Iranian Ambassador to India was summoned last week and explicitly told that the vessel MV Assa needs to be shifted from its current location as the country faces grave terrorist threats from the sea.
***

Another area of concern for the coastal security agencies is the unclear status of several boats, which regularly visit MV Assa, drop cargo and return. Iran has been maintain a stoic silence on the issue and it later claimed that the vessel was headed to Singapore.

Contrary to it, the crew claimed they were going to Colombo, then China. However, the ship has not moved an inch since then.

India cannot press for answers as rules of the sea allow complete freedom of navigation within a country’s EEZ.
***

More here.

South China Sea: Japan and India Join in Rejecting Chinese Claims

A little report of some tension with China over the South China Sea leading to new alliances here:

With China flexing muscles in its neighbourhood, India and Japan on Thursday came together to assert their freedom of navigation in international sea lanes.

Defence minister A. K Antony met his Japanese counterpart Yasuo Ichikawa in Tokyo and discussed maritime security issues. India had recently tasted China's high handedness in the seas. An Indian warship on the way to a Vietnamese port received a warning on its radio that it should steer clear of the South China Sea. It is believed that the communication came from the Chinese as it has a maritime dispute with Vietnam.