India’s foreign policy must look seaward

Why in the News?

Of the 14 Indians killed in West Asia conflict-related attacks since 28 February, at least eight were seafarers. This exposes how India’s foreign policy apparatus treats its roughly 3.2 lakh seafarers as a shipping matter until a crisis turns them into a consular emergency.

Why does responsibility for an Indian seafarer’s safety become unclear at exactly the moment it matters most?

1. A single jurisdictional authority: A seafarer may be recruited in Mumbai, hired by a Singapore-based company, placed on a ship flagged to Panama, carrying Kuwaiti oil, and attacked off Oman, leaving no single authority fully responsible.
2. India’s consular system is organised by territory, but seafarers are not: A seafarer crosses multiple jurisdictions during a single voyage, and an Indian mission may not know a national is nearby until a ship is seized, abandoned, or attacked.
3. The scale problem: India’s seafarer workforce stands at about 3.2 lakh (June 2025), nearly three times its size in 2014. This makes India the second largest supplier of seafarers globally after the Philippines, according to the 2026 Seafarer Workforce Report.
4. Abandonment data confirms the gap is systemic: International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) data show 1,125 Indian seafarers were abandoned in 2025. This was the highest for any country, with responsibility split among the flag state, port authority, shipowner, insurer, and Indian mission.

What has the government actually done, and where does it fall short?

1. The Seafarer First response: Introduced after the recent West Asia strikes, it includes a dashboard tracking ships, threats, and crew welfare, along with a liaison officer for each affected family.
2. A targeted precaution: On 15 July, the government advised shipowners, managers, and recruitment agencies to avoid deploying Indian seafarers on vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz until further orders.
3. An existing but narrow enforcement tool: The Directorate General of Shipping (DGS) order of 14 May bars licensed recruitment agencies from placing seafarers on 366 vessels linked to crew abandonment, unless compliance conditions are met. However, seafarers currently have to search for the list themselves before accepting employment.
4. The dashboard’s structural limit: It can track ships, but cannot compel a flag state or shipowner to act, nor secure access to a detained seafarer.

What would closing the gap actually require?

1. A standing maritime consular protocol: Clearly defining institutional responsibility from the moment a distress signal is received, instead of responding only after a crisis unfolds.
2. Designated port-level officers: Indian missions at major shipping hubs should have officers familiar with port authorities, hospitals, insurers, and legal systems before emergencies arise.
3. Multilateral pressure on flag states: India, the Philippines, and Indonesia could jointly push through the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) for stronger standards on legal assistance and repatriation.
4. A seafarer’s right to know before signing: Mandatory disclosure of a vessel’s true ownership, sanctions status, insurance validity, and history of crew abandonment, along with the right to refuse deployment to high-risk regions without penalty.

Conclusion

India’s maritime ambitions extend beyond ports, shipping, and naval power. Protecting the country’s 3.2 lakh seafarers requires a permanent maritime consular framework, stronger international cooperation, and greater legal safeguards. India’s responsibility to its citizens should not end with a foreign flag on the vessel.

Back2Basics

1. Flag of Convenience (FoC): The practice of registering a merchant ship in a country other than that of its owners to benefit from lower taxes or lighter regulations, often complicating legal accountability for crew welfare.
2. Maritime Labour Convention (MLC), 2006: An International Labour Organization (ILO) convention that establishes minimum global standards for seafarers’ working and living conditions, including wages, health protection, and repatriation rights.

PYQ Relevance

[UPSC 2025] Why is maritime security vital to protect India’s sea trade? Discuss maritime and coastal security challenges and the way forward.

Linkage: The PYQ examines India’s maritime security, sea trade, and challenges in protecting maritime interests. The article extends maritime security beyond naval issues to the safety, consular protection, and welfare of Indian seafarers during international crises.