By Dr Pooja Bhatt
Communities living on the borders of two countries have always remained a sensitive topic both from domestic and international political vantage points. Coastal communities are no different and The Katchatheevu imbroglio needs to be seen from that view. The dispute over fishing rights can be resolved without adversely impacting upcoming elections in India and its government’s approach to maintaining good relations with its neighbours
The fact of the matter
Katchatheevu’s locus standi arrived from the 1976 Agreement on the delimitation of a boundary through the “historic waters” of Palk Bay between India and Sri Lanka. A maritime boundary delimitation agreement between the two sovereign parties derives its validity from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969. While India is not a party to the Convention it follows its provisions in practice. The 1974 Agreement did three things: it delimited the waters between the two countries nearly in an equitable manner by drawing an International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL), prohibits fishermen from two countries from fishing in each other’s historic waters, territorial seas and EEZ, but Art5 allows “. Fishermen from both countries enjoy access to visit Kachchativu…”. However, Art 6 states that “the vessels of India and Sri Lanka will enjoy in each other’s waters such rights as they have traditionally enjoyed therein” was revoked during the Emergency imposed by the Indira Gandhi government in 1976 through an executive instruction.
Also Read The MV Ruen Episode: Payoffs from Investing in Naval and Air Power Pakistan’s Kashmir Over- Obsession is Suicidal Trouble in the air Tax burden on a minority: ITR filing has improved, but how long can less than 3% support the rest? Also Read
Katchatheevu Island debate intensifies: Congress fires back at PM Modi’s accusations, here’s what the whole controversy is about – India News | The Financial Express
Fishing is a sensitive issue between India and Sri Lanka. The Indian government has been often charged for indirectly fueling illegal fishing through subsidies provided to its fishermen. The basic objective was economically fair- that fishermen can buy bigger boats and fuel, and move away from immediate waters to transform themselves from traditional to commercial fishermen. But waters near the Palk Bay are known as rich fishing grounds and therefore Indian fishermen, with their newly acquired deep trawlers go back to fish in those waters, something disliked by their Sri Lankan counterparts.
While the details of the circumstances under which the 1974 Agreement was signed are still emerging, presently Katchatheevu island lies towards Sri Lanka’s IMBL. In a reciprocal deal, India did recognize Sri Lanka’s sovereignty on the island in return for Indian sovereignty over Wedge Island lying close to Cape Comorin. However, the articles of the 1974 bilateral agreement make it clear that both countries have equal access to certain parts of Palk Bay. Fishermen of both countries have continued to access the island and therefore, the argument calling the island being ceded is practically incoherent.
The argument regarding the uselessness of Katchatheevu as a rock that led Gandhi’s government to give it away can be countered. The 1974 agreement precedes the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas, also known as UNCLOS 1982 and Constitution of the Seas. The Regime of Islands section under UNCLOS calls for the fulfilment of certain criteria such as availability of fresh water, ability to sustain life and generate economic possibilities to call a land formation/rock in the middle of seas an island. Katchatheevu doesn’t have a fresh water source but stations a British era Church visited by communities as well fishermen from both countries halt on the island to dry their fish catch. Ideally, it is more of a rock with some human intervention. It also means it might hold the potential to be used as a platform for cooperation by both countries if negotiated properly.
Also Read
Will have to wage war to get back Katchatheevu Island: Govt to SC – Archive News | The Financial Express
Trust Sri Lanka
Fisheries laws in India are a state subject. Therefore Tamil Nadu’s government’s sensitivities towards its fishing community for its economic and human wellbeing are understandable. Also the fishing community holds a strong position as the voting base which further complicates the issue for the State and Central government.
At the same time, the Indian government has been proactively engaged in increasing its cooperation with its neighbouring countries including its littoral neighbours such as Sri Lanka, Maldives, Mauritius etc. With para-diplomacy becoming an emerging tool in international affairs, states and provinces of respective countries can also play a major role in furthering the Central government’s causes.
However, recently the Sri Lankan government has affirmed its relations with India by publicly stating that it would not allow its land to be used against India and its interests. Disallowing suspicious Chinese research vessels to dock in its ports in the last few months on India’s request was a step in a similar direction. Therefore, the argument that Sri Lanka can give the island to China, needs to be taken with a large
Domestically, India is aiming to become a fish exporter. The poor fishermen community that seeks economic security needs governmental support to move beyond coastal waters and become a distant water fisherman. It is a long-term investment through constant education and technical support but with even better returns for the GDP. At the same time, it is an opportune time for the Indian government to talk to the state government about using its island for building goodwill and opportunities for the Tamil population staying on both sides of Palk Bay.
Also Read
Katchatheevu’s restoration to India only solution to stand off with Sri Lankan navy, says Tamil Nadu CM K Palaniswami – India News | The Financial Express
Preamble for peace
Lessons from history can be taken to improve the future. The 1974 Agreement in its preamble says, “Desiring to determine the boundary line in the historic waters between Sri Lanka and India and to settle the related matters in a manner which is fair and equitable to both sides”. With cooperation in the maritime domain becoming a pillar of India’s engagement with its neighbours under SAGAR policy, it is high time that instead of raising the issue that may lead to domestic turbulence and international backlash, New Delhi needs to put its words into action.
The author is an expert on Maritime security and the Author of the Nine Dash Line; Deciphering the South China Sea Conundrum.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of Financial Express Online. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.
By Dr Pooja Bhatt
Communities living on the borders of two countries have always remained a sensitive topic both from domestic and international political vantage points. Coastal communities are no different and The Katchatheevu imbroglio needs to be seen from that view. The dispute over fishing rights can be resolved without adversely impacting upcoming elections in India and its government’s approach to maintaining good relations with its neighbours
Katchatheevu’s locus standi arrived from the 1976 Agreement on the delimitation of a boundary through the “historic waters” of Palk Bay between India and Sri Lanka. A maritime boundary delimitation agreement between the two sovereign parties derives its validity from the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969. While India is not a party to the Convention it follows its provisions in practice. The 1974 Agreement did three things: it delimited the waters between the two countries nearly in an equitable manner by drawing an International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL), prohibits fishermen from two countries from fishing in each other’s historic waters, territorial seas and EEZ, but Art5 allows “. Fishermen from both countries enjoy access to visit Kachchativu…”. However, Art 6 states that “the vessels of India and Sri Lanka will enjoy in each other’s waters such rights as they have traditionally enjoyed therein” was revoked during the Emergency imposed by the Indira Gandhi government in 1976 through an executive instruction.
Fishing is a sensitive issue between India and Sri Lanka. The Indian government has been often charged for indirectly fueling illegal fishing through subsidies provided to its fishermen. The basic objective was economically fair- that fishermen can buy bigger boats and fuel, and move away from immediate waters to transform themselves from traditional to commercial fishermen. But waters near the Palk Bay are known as rich fishing grounds and therefore Indian fishermen, with their newly acquired deep trawlers go back to fish in those waters, something disliked by their Sri Lankan counterparts.
While the details of the circumstances under which the 1974 Agreement was signed are still emerging, presently Katchatheevu island lies towards Sri Lanka’s IMBL. In a reciprocal deal, India did recognize Sri Lanka’s sovereignty on the island in return for Indian sovereignty over Wedge Island lying close to Cape Comorin. However, the articles of the 1974 bilateral agreement make it clear that both countries have equal access to certain parts of Palk Bay. Fishermen of both countries have continued to access the island and therefore, the argument calling the island being ceded is practically incoherent.
The argument regarding the uselessness of Katchatheevu as a rock that led Gandhi’s government to give it away can be countered. The 1974 agreement precedes the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas, also known as UNCLOS 1982 and Constitution of the Seas. The Regime of Islands section under UNCLOS calls for the fulfilment of certain criteria such as availability of fresh water, ability to sustain life and generate economic possibilities to call a land formation/rock in the middle of seas an island. Katchatheevu doesn’t have a fresh water source but stations a British era Church visited by communities as well fishermen from both countries halt on the island to dry their fish catch. Ideally, it is more of a rock with some human intervention. It also means it might hold the potential to be used as a platform for cooperation by both countries if negotiated properly.
Fisheries laws in India are a state subject. Therefore Tamil Nadu’s government’s sensitivities towards its fishing community for its economic and human wellbeing are understandable. Also the fishing community holds a strong position as the voting base which further complicates the issue for the State and Central government.
At the same time, the Indian government has been proactively engaged in increasing its cooperation with its neighbouring countries including its littoral neighbours such as Sri Lanka, Maldives, Mauritius etc. With para-diplomacy becoming an emerging tool in international affairs, states and provinces of respective countries can also play a major role in furthering the Central government’s causes.
However, recently the Sri Lankan government has affirmed its relations with India by publicly stating that it would not allow its land to be used against India and its interests. Disallowing suspicious Chinese research vessels to dock in its ports in the last few months on India’s request was a step in a similar direction. Therefore, the argument that Sri Lanka can give the island to China, needs to be taken with a large
Domestically, India is aiming to become a fish exporter. The poor fishermen community that seeks economic security needs governmental support to move beyond coastal waters and become a distant water fisherman. It is a long-term investment through constant education and technical support but with even better returns for the GDP. At the same time, it is an opportune time for the Indian government to talk to the state government about using its island for building goodwill and opportunities for the Tamil population staying on both sides of Palk Bay.
Lessons from history can be taken to improve the future. The 1974 Agreement in its preamble says, “Desiring to determine the boundary line in the historic waters between Sri Lanka and India and to settle the related matters in a manner which is fair and equitable to both sides”. With cooperation in the maritime domain becoming a pillar of India’s engagement with its neighbours under SAGAR policy, it is high time that instead of raising the issue that may lead to domestic turbulence and international backlash, New Delhi needs to put its words into action.
The author is an expert on Maritime security and the Author of the Nine Dash Line; Deciphering the South China Sea Conundrum.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal and do not reflect the official position or policy of Financial Express Online. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.
Get live Share Market updates, Stock Market Quotes, and the latest India News and business news on Financial Express. Download the Financial Express App for the latest finance news.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
Michael Kwet
visit website
