Abstract
This article aims to focus the attention of the Sri Lankan polity on devising a coherent strategy for the Indian Ocean region (IOR). It takes a decisive stance on the absence of an Indian Ocean–centric order, advocating for a unique code of conduct centered on the concept of a peace zone. This zone would uphold core values such as freedom of navigation and accessibility to all for sustainable use. Unlike other works on Indo-Pacific strategy, this article offers a fresh perspective by presenting a comprehensive argument on the reality of strategic constructs. It sheds light on how the IOR has been relegated to a mere strategic supplement, despite its significance as a global conduit. By highlighting these concerns, the article proposes a fivefold approach to realize an Indian Ocean strategic outlook for Sri Lanka. This approach aims to position Sri Lanka as a credible maritime stakeholder in the IOR, serving its national interests effectively.
***
The current century is defined by significant disruption, transformation, contention, and convergence. The epicenter of global trade, security, and demographics has unequivocally shifted to Asia, housing nearly 55 percent of the world’s population.[1] As a result, the events and trajectories of the twenty-first century are poised to predominantly unfold in the Asian theater, at least in the foreseeable future.[2] The emergence of artificial intelligence, the COVID-19 pandemic, and ensuing trade and ideological disputes epitomize the defining features of this era. A surge in geopolitical awareness, the formation of opposing alliances, and the conceptual convergence of the Indian and Pacific oceans within the Asian region have been witnessed.
These strategic paradigms, ambitions, and aspirations have fueled escalating tensions among both traditional and emerging power players. Within this context, the possibility of Asia evolving into the battleground for global hegemony cannot be dismissed, with the Indian Ocean region (IOR) potentially mirroring the Balkans of past conflicts. It is crucial to recognize that 66 percent of global wealth originates from or near the sea, 70 percent of the Earth’s surface is covered by oceans, 80 percent of the world’s population resides in coastal areas, 90 percent of goods are transported by sea, and 99 percent of international digital traffic traverses through submarine cables.[3] Consequently, the IOR has emerged as a vital conduit for global connectivity.
The IOR, comprising 28 states and spanning three continents, covers 17.5 percent of the total landmass and is home to 35 percent of the world’s population. Preceding their colonial eras, India and China reigned as the largest economies in human civilization for over two millennia until the 1820s. Today, these nations are reclaiming their economic prowess, sparking a series of contentions over competition. Given this backdrop, it is imperative that the IOR remains peaceful and accessible to all for sustainable use.
This article advocates for a tranquil IOR rooted in the principles delineated in the 1955 Bandung Agreement, which designated the Indian Ocean as a peace zone. Despite historical tumult, the IOR has experienced a relative era of peace compared to other regions. Fulfilling obligations in the region is crucial for the survival of the Sri Lankan people, state, and collective aspirations.
Therefore, the pursuit of a lasting road map for the IOR demands a definitive understanding of the area of responsibility and area of interest. Sri Lanka must equally prioritize events unfolding in the high seas and the residual effects of the Himalayan conundrum, which directly impact its interests, peace, prosperity, and partnerships. The security of the Indian mainland should be acknowledged as a persistent concern, taking precedence over engagements with regional and extraregional parties.[4]
However, the costs of dependency, trade domination, security, and economic concerns are well grasped. Traditional modes of thought in the IOR must be discarded in favor of innovative perspectives that discern between rhetoric and reality. Articulating an IOR policy—or an order—is therefore crucial and practical. This is vital to generate opportunities for exponential growth as envisioned by 2048.
The formulation of a Sri Lankan IOR policy is a timely undertaking that confronts a fundamental flaw that has previously impeded Colombo’s quest for prosperity, progress, security, and contentment as both a nation-state and a maritime stakeholder.
Strategic Assessment for an Order in the IOR
Relevance of the Indian Ocean
The Indian Ocean has long functioned as a nexus of civilizations, facilitating trade, cultural interchange, and technological progress for centuries. Significant historical episodes such as the spice trade, the Silk Road, and the expeditions of explorers like Vasco da Gama underscore its importance. In the current epoch, the Indian Ocean remains a linchpin of global commerce. From the vibrant ports of ancient trade routes to the strategic waters of modern geopolitics, it has profoundly influenced our past. Presently, we stand at a crucial juncture as the dynamics of the Indian Ocean undergo an unparalleled transformation.
Navigating the Turbulence of the Twenty-first Century
The strategic assessment outlined here is rooted in three principles that justify a plea for a well-organized Indian Ocean, where peace and shared prosperity can triumph over rhetoric, warmongering, and strategic frameworks. In a world characterized by narratives and propaganda, these convictions are as follows: firstly, to offer a comprehensive analysis of the pursuit for order; secondly, to scrutinize the deceptive proliferation of strategic frameworks or exclusive ideologies; and finally, to champion the "pursuit of a path of collective wisdom" as the cornerstone for order in the IOR.
Rationale for an Orderly Indian Ocean
Order, in its manifold interpretations, encompasses diverse perspectives, values, and beliefs held by various groups. As Henry Kissinger emphatically asserts, “no truly global ‘world order’ has ever existed.”[5] Thus, it is intriguing to examine what regional experts perceive as the “emerging new order,” which in turn raises questions about the order that truly existed and prevailed in the Indian Ocean.
The concept of this ostensible order traces its roots to the conclusion of the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) in Europe, during which political entities, none potent enough to conquer the others, sought to regulate their behavior and mitigate conflict. This is commonly known as the Westphalian Order, which acknowledged the domestic structures and religious vocations of fellow states as realities and refrained from challenging their existence. Similarly, Chinese civilization had its own order, known as “all under heaven” or tianxia, which was more philosophical and had endured for more than a millennium. This concept differed from the Western notion of sovereignty, which appeared to be grounded in the principles of the balance of power.[6]
The era of Western colonization witnessed a complex interplay of power dynamics that reached its zenith in the nineteenth century. The Concert of Europe was established to uphold stagnant conservative monarchies, which had been rattled by the Napoleonic wars.[7] Despite the dominance of the British, French, and Dutch fleets in the Indian Ocean, Asia remained somewhat removed from the European power struggle. Prior to the nineteenth century, Europeans had to show deference to Asian powers and forge alliances with local elites before gaining permission to establish trading posts. These dynamics are well documented in Sri Lanka’s history as well.
During the world wars, the Indian Ocean held secondary importance, with the Atlantic and Pacific theaters taking precedence in strategic alliances and warfare. The aftermath of these conflicts saw a restructuring of global order based on ideological differences, marking the onset of the Cold War era and the rapid decolonization of Asian and African territories by European empires. The emergence of new states also fueled a wave of nationalism across Africa, South Asia, and East Asia. However, leaders of newly formed African and Asian states were wary of being drawn into others’ spheres of influence, conflicts, and standoffs. They were keenly aware of the evolving realities and the importance of preserving the Indian Ocean free from strategic constructs, a sentiment that was articulated clearly in the 1955 Bandung Conference and later affirmed in the 1972 UN General Assembly declaration of the Indian Ocean as a peace zone.
Examining the foundational principles of the Bandung Conference reveals its endeavor to construct a distinct order among newly independent states in the IOR. Sri Lanka takes pride in its role as a cosponsor, alongside the governments of Burma (Myanmar), India, Indonesia, and Pakistan, which ultimately led to the establishment of the Non-Aligned Movement in 1961.
Further evidence of the aspiration for order in Asia can be found in the “Panchsheel,” or the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, formulated through negotiations between India and China in 1954.[8] However, partnerships have grown increasingly complex in the IOR during the twenty-first century, and this trend is expected to persist in an era characterized by artificial intelligence, assertive nationalism, and heightened consumerism.
Illusions and Alliances
This is where the focus shifts to the second idea: the illusory nature of strategic constructs or exclusive cults. These constructs contribute to the buildup of worrying security alliances in the IOR, potentially drawing littoral states into areas of contention and possible future conflicts. Despite the rhetoric of “free and open” seas, island spaces in the IOR remain colonized. This contradiction is particularly evident in an era where a rules-based order and global governance are touted as essential for forming alliances and partnerships. It is worth recalling the late Sri Lankan prime minister Hon. Sir John Kotelawala’s assertion at the Bandung Conference in 1955: “We have done away with Western Colonialism. We don’t want to start an Eastern Colonialism in its place,” a statement that still resonates and underscores the collective interests of all states in the IOR.[9]
The IOR has emerged as the focal point of great-power competition. The assertion that it has become the “Holy Grail” for balance of power in the twenty-first century is not without merit. This reality is underscored by the strategic constructs of the Indo-Pacific and the western Indian Ocean regions. However, the argument against the validity of such constructs stems from their flawed origins. For instance, the Indo-Pacific concept, according to some interpretations, extends from the western coast of India to the western coast of the United States, effectively excluding the entire western Indian Ocean region. Conversely, other similar constructs, such as those envisioned in France’s Indo-Pacific strategy, Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) strategy, and India’s Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR) initiative, encompass the rest of the Indian Ocean but carry different connotations. The European Union’s version primarily involves seven G20 member states and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) states, while ASEAN itself has developed its own Indo-Pacific Outlook, centered on ASEAN centrality.
Champions Dilemma
Examining the illusory nature of certain constructs reveals a prioritization of advocates for a global rules-based order often at the expense of others. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) perfectly illustrates this “champion’s dilemma”: some signatories struggle to fulfill their obligations, while others operate in the shadows without ratifying the convention. It is crucial and prudent not to treat UNCLOS as a fragile entity, hoping it will dissolve under pressure. To underscore this point, consider an assertion made by the American thinker Ralph Waldo Emerson in his “Politics” in 1844: “All those who have pretended this design, have been partial reformers, and have admitted in some manner the supremacy of the bad State.”[10] This suggests that such attempts to reform acknowledge existing flaws without fully addressing them, thereby perpetuating the influence of the flawed state of affairs.
The proliferation of alphabetical constructs, primarily strategic-military alliances, has made it increasingly challenging to track which entities are aligned with whom and why “A” is excluded from one grouping while appearing in another, despite expressing similar concerns, interests, and aspirations. It is unfortunate for the new generation of international relations students who find themselves entangled in a complex web of connections and alliances. The Indo-Pacific discourse ultimately stems from a concerning phenomenon in politics. In many respects, these divisive constructs mirror the fourth-century Athenian democracy, which fragmented as a political entity. The notion of democracy became a pretext for turning against anyone deemed an enemy of the state. In many ways, this period was characterized by total uncertainty, much like our present era. This paradox defines our world today.
The principle of a rules-based order or even the sanctions regime no longer seems as self-evident as it did years ago, partly due to doubts arising over its construction and application. The same benign necessity and practical abuse are evident in the factions that each state divides itself into: proponents and opponents of the rules-based order. The architects of such strategic constructs believe their end state is near its peak, but it seems to be only the beginning of the day.
An Asian Model of Collective Wisdom
Unlike modern divisive strategic constructs, the confluence of oceans, specifically the Indian Ocean, remains an enduring concept with clear delineations. This emphasizes the third idea: pursuing a path of collective wisdom as the basis for order in the IOR.
Historically, the Indian Ocean has served as the “mediator” between the Eastern and Western worlds for millennia, providing more than what theoretical notions of confluence of oceans could offer. It served as the foundation for globalization in the ancient world, a realization that is experiencing a resurgence in the twenty-first century. As former Indian National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon noted in his 2019 Bandaranaike Memorial Oration, “The Indian Ocean world has the historical experience and has displayed the wisdom necessary in the past to manage its affairs more often than not. What our region does possess richly, is a practical ethic of co-existence. If we can do it again in the future, we can prove the prophets of doom wrong.”[11]
The recent Indian and Chinese pledge to maintain “peace and tranquility” along borders in August 2023 evokes collective wisdom. Once these great civilizations learn to manage the Himalayan conundrum, this will usher in a revival of a truly Asian global order. Trade between India and China ought to be complementary, not contentious. The hope is that the same spirit will extend from the Himalayas to the IOR, akin to the origins of the monsoons that have shaped cultures, existence, and connectivity over millennia.
This should be the premise for the order in the IOR, natural in contrast to divisive strategic constructs or alphabetical orders. Sri Lanka must be aware of the pitfalls of blind emulation. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and the conflict between Israel and Iran and Tehran’s proxies provide compelling evidence to this assertion. Amid these turbulences, there is an opportunity to create an Asian model of international relations or a regional order underpinned by the maritime salience of the IOR. India has taken leadership in this regard, evident in its support for Mauritius in the UN General Assembly adopting a resolution in favor of Mauritius in 2019, on principles of decolonization and nonalignment.[12]
Ignoring the existing realities of the region is not an option. A clear void exists regarding an IOR centrality. So far, the IOR has been regarded and attributed as a strategic supplement rather than recognized for its true potential as the global conduit. The ASEAN Outlook provides an ideal blueprint in the formulation and realization of an IOR centrality in global dynamics. The principles guiding an Indian Ocean order should include UNCLOS at the core of its rules-based order and free trade devoid of hypocritical arm twisting, intimidations, and other forms of economic, military, and political coercive measures. Further, the G20 principles of quality infrastructure development should take precedence in a new connectivity outlook for the IOR. An Indian Ocean order should accommodate anyone without disturbing the coexistence of others.
Synthesis of the Future Strategic Environment
Analyzing the future strategic landscape with a focus on interests until 2030 is a challenging task. As we enter the third decade of the twenty-first century, rapid changes and transformations from our way of life to international supply chains are occurring. The advent of disruptive technologies, from the Internet of Things and 5G to artificial intelligence and high-immersive media, along with pandemics and an increasing wave of alliance-making and nationalistic perspectives, are hallmarks of the era. There is a marked shift of order from liberalism to realism. The multilateral order that defined macro-level undertakings in the beginning of the twenty-first century is crumbling as the world is polarized among self-proclaimed net security providers, champions of rules-based order, and emerging global power players. In this dynamic context, states have become more assertive in ensuring national interests are not compromised at any cost. Thus, there is a marked deviation from the consensus, dialogues, and cooperation-based initiatives that were so apparent before 2015. This is true on a global scale.
As previously stated, there is zero possibility of external aggression into Sri Lanka’s littoral. But this analysis does not rule out the existence of other forms of gray-zone tactics (information intrusions, economic coercion, and use of proxy front groups, individuals) aimed at destabilizing, disrupting, and undermining political-economic stability, national will, cohesion, and sovereignty. They seek success through increasing Sri Lanka’s strategic vulnerabilities, increasing their leverage into our domestic affairs and way of life leading to a state of perennial dependence and rent seeking. Domestic disturbances, hasty constitutional reforms, youth uprisings, forced peacekeeping initiatives, separatist war, mega project loans, Easter Sunday bombings, civil unrests might be a few instances of this grim reality. In the face of Sri Lanka’s severe economic crisis, it is clear that external aid will not be provided solely out of altruism; there will inevitably be associated opportunity costs. The crucial question is how Sri Lanka can secure economic lifelines while maintaining its sovereignty and managing strategic relationships.
Sri Lanka’s strategic location along the East-West trade route is undeniable, making this island nation’s geographical position its most valuable natural asset, tracing back to the era predating sails and the maritime Silk Route. However, recent efforts, which some perceive as insincere, have sought to diminish this advantage, ostensibly in the name of environmental activism. These developments warrant careful scrutiny.[13]
Sacrificing Sri Lanka’s national aspirations, prosperity, and opportunities for future generations to hegemonic interests and unrealistic fearmongering is no longer acceptable. The island’s development trajectory over the past 50 years provides ample examples of hypocritical meddling in its domestic affairs, aimed at diminishing opportunities for societal progress, political stability, and economic development. Therefore, Colombo must be more assertive and astute in pursuing Sri Lanka’s aspirations and ambitions, prioritizing them over unrealistic geopolitical inhibitions and alarmist rhetoric.
A Vision for Peace and Prosperity
This is not a revised version of Francis Fukuyama’s End of History narrative, but a realization of the IOR as a peace zone, free from colonization and militarization. It embraces inclusivity and connectivity, moving away from great-power competition. It serves as a sanctuary for numerous small democracies, states aspiring toward a path of sustainable development, progress, and prosperity for citizens. In the current order, states are either hammers or anvils. More often than not, states find themselves as anvils. However, this should not be the defining future.
Every significant and influential moment in world history marks the triumph of some enthusiasm. The same enthusiasm is needed today to command a view of the IOR.
Sri Lankan Policy Outlook in the IOR
The above assessment and the current security environment means that we are to be ready for a resurfacing of perpetual conflict of identities (e.g. Israel-Palestine; Ukraine-Russia etc.). Global perceptions will be deeply divided and further disintegrate into minute identity matters that will remain absolutely difficult to resolve, leading to harsher decision making and actions.
Sri Lanka, an island nation fortified by its natural maritime defenses, possesses limited natural resources, geographical scale, and terrain coveted by other nations for their strategic significance in power projection, sustenance, and defense. The absence of an immediate hinterland in Sri Lanka necessitates the forging of stronger partnerships with India, ASEAN, and Africa. Yet, the nation grapples with deep-seated divisions on matters ranging from values and politics to identity.
Economically beleaguered and embroiled in a fierce struggle between two formidable factions, Sri Lanka’s national security doctrine remains profoundly influenced by its distinctive geostrategic location and post-independence history.[14] The evolving geopolitical landscape further positions the country as a potential flashpoint in the region. Across millennia, the island has endured the consequences of neglecting its maritime sphere, demanding prudent and concerted strategies to mitigate associated risks.
In light of this imperative, Sri Lanka must chart a pragmatic, multi-faceted course to assert and safeguard its interests for sustained prosperity and stability, thereby enhancing its role as a credible stakeholder in the IOR. Recent missteps and misguided policy ventures underscore the urgency for Sri Lanka to meticulously assess the risks and probabilities inherent in securing access to affordable energy and ensuring food security.[15]
The Blueprint for an IOR Strategy and Desired Outcomes
Sri Lanka’s IOR policy must embody the country’s steadfast dedication to safeguarding the safety and security of its populace, while upholding territorial integrity and sovereignty in the face of global uncertainties and complexities. Central to this policy is the guarantee of freedom of navigation, trade, and commerce, recognized as essential imperatives benefiting all stakeholders within the region and beyond.
This approach demands assertiveness and credibility, fostering confidence, cooperation, and ongoing dialogue on shared sociopolitical, economic, technological, and security challenges within the IOR and its peripheries. Achieving this goal necessitates the cultivation of robust, expansive bilateral and multilateral relationships, thereby contributing to the promotion of regional and global peace.
Furthermore, the strategy must remain cognizant of global externalities, including pandemics, economic downturns, financial market instabilities, climate change, and environmental and man-made disasters. Sri Lanka must be prepared to effectively respond to and mitigate such crises. Within this framework, it is recommended that Sri Lanka adopts a comprehensive fivefold approach in its orientation and engagements within the IOR.
- First, as an island nation, Sri Lanka must approach its defense, security, development, and forthcoming challenges through the lens of its maritime identity.
- Second, fostering a network of regional and global partnerships is imperative for Sri Lanka to maintain relevance in global discussions concerning peace, collective prosperity, stability, and sustainability.
- Third, proactive measures must be undertaken to uphold the IOR as a bastion of stability, peace, and cooperation. Commitments should revolve around fostering freedom and openness as fundamental principles, aligning with the values and norms of the IOR. These include upholding the freedom of navigation, rejecting coercion, advocating for an open-market economy, and prioritizing private enterprise to bolster regional freedom, stability, and prosperity.
- Fourth, achieving sustainable economic development and addressing the impacts of climate change necessitate ambition and astute planning.
- Fifth, a comprehensive whole-of-governmental approach, in collaboration with international and multinational partners, is indispensable. This collaboration aims to bolster capabilities and capacities in critical domains such as maritime domain awareness, maritime safety, security enforcement, customs regulations, maritime law, natural resource protection, maritime search and rescue operations, disaster response initiatives, and port operations and security.
The Fivefold Approach
First, Sri Lanka, as an island nation, confronts defense, security, developmental, and prospective challenges that demand scrutiny through the maritime prism. Being inherently maritime, Sri Lanka grapples with limited natural resources, geographical constraints, and terrain coveted by other nations for sustenance and defense. Thus, recognizing the reality of vulnerability across economic, political, technological, and military dimensions is imperative in a global landscape marked by profound shifts in traditional geopolitics and socioeconomic alliances.
Since attaining independence, Sri Lanka has weathered significant social upheavals, unrest, insurrections, and a prolonged terrorist insurgency spanning nearly two and a half decades. The 2019 Easter Sunday bombings and subsequent events of the past year, culminating in widespread chaos, calamity, and unprecedented violence, underscore this troubling trend. In an era dominated by narratives, propaganda, and pervasive media, deep-seated divisions persist across myriad spheres, from values and politics to identity.
To circumvent emotionally charged narratives and political entrapments that risk precipitating societal tribalism, concerted efforts toward fostering a progressive society are indispensable. A deeper examination of these dynamics reveals the necessity for astuteness and assertiveness in countering influences emanating from the periphery and infiltrating the nation’s core. Within this context, the IOR and its numerous littoral states serve as breeding grounds for such deleterious externalities. Deliberate proxy interventions aimed at undermining national unity, exploiting underlying fault lines of ethnicity, religion, race, and language by regional and extraregional actors cannot be discounted.
Neglecting to address and mitigate these paradoxes could spell catastrophe for the nation’s survival and sovereignty. The prerogative to counter unwanted intrusions and coercive influences into domestic affairs, whether through loans, aid, donations, or grants, remains sacrosanct. Moreover, an array of unforeseen internal and external challenges and threats must be confronted. To address these challenges, fostering and fortifying social cohesion and national resolve are imperative.
Repeatedly, the ascent of religious entrepreneurs, ethno-political cults, and more recently, political and social entrepreneurs has been witnessed and felt. Some resort to manipulating public perceptions through indoctrination, radicalization, mass mobilization, and misinformation, challenging societal values, norms, and communal harmony, thereby jeopardizing peace, security, law, and order. Their objective is to disrupt normalcy and impede societal progress. Often, these groups cloak themselves as social crusaders, espousing entitlement doctrines to fuel their envy and fragile egos. These toxic entities effectively sway targeted segments of society to exert control over prevailing circumstances. Pre-existing political, structural, and institutional discontent provide fertile ground for such aberrations and the proliferation of these delusional cults and high-conflict personalities. This presents an enduring challenge and a delicate governance matter, while ensuring the preservation of civil liberties, freedom, fundamental rights, and democracy. Hence, prudent and concerted strategies are imperative to mitigate risks.
Second, fostering a network of regional and global partnerships and relationships is indispensable for Sri Lanka to maintain relevance in the global discourse on peace, shared prosperity, stability, and sustainability. The Sri Lankan government has affirmed its commitment to pursue a multilayered regional approach as an avenue to position itself as a pivotal trade and maritime hub within the IOR.[16] Vigilantly observing the dynamics of the maritime expanse and the evolving strategic interests and alliances of both global and regional actors is paramount. The emergence of regional forums such as the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA), ASEAN, and subregional groupings like the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), the Australia–United Kingdom–United States (AUKUS) trilateral, the Indian Ocean Commission (IOC), and the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) underscores the escalating significance of cooperative multilateralism in shaping the region’s trajectory. Multilateral engagement is pivotal in navigating the emerging order in the IOR, recognizing the imperative for collaborative platforms that foster dialogue, cooperation, and the peaceful resolution of disputes and conflicts.
It is paramount to acknowledge that the stability of the IOR hinges heavily on cooperative endeavors among nations. Geopolitical tensions and security challenges possess the potential to disrupt the envisioned economic prosperity and tranquility.
However, the depth and resilience of these multilateral relationships have faced reality checks since 2009, serving as poignant lessons. Sincerity and trust remain foundational tenets in navigating the regional landscape. The enduring historical and cultural ties maintained over millennia with the Indian and Chinese civilizations are cherished. These relationships have endured the trials of time, shaping the distinct culture, traditions, values, and beliefs of the region. In this regard, the island state serves as a conduit for interaction, dialogue, and mutual understanding between these primary cultural entities.
Expectations for bilateral arrangements extend beyond mere rhetoric, which often falls short of the goals and objectives outlined during their inception. Such endeavors should not devolve into futile exchanges that drain public finances on either side. Hence, there exists an urgent imperative to reassess the impact and feasibility of continuing such commitments, thereby conserving time, resources, and expenses.
The path forward, capitalizing on Sri Lanka’s unique geographical position, entails pursuing commercial relations devoid of political entanglements. Embracing the evolving geoeconomic landscape, particularly in Asia, is crucial for success. Promising opportunities for vital collaboration and cooperation lie with ASEAN, particularly its five IOR member states—Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, and Indonesia. Greater economic benefits can be reaped through regional trade, foreign direct investment within the region, tourism, and economic partnerships. Furthermore, the strengths of other island nations in the IOR—such as Maldives, Mauritius, Madagascar, and Seychelles—can be leveraged through the provision of educational, training, and capacity-building opportunities. African and OPEC member states also merit consideration, given their impact on energy security and the flow of overseas remittances.
Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) collectively wield significant potential to shape the emerging new order in the IOR. While not originally conceived as a regional organization focused on the IOR, BRICS member states boast considerable economic, political, and military capabilities. Their collaborative endeavors have the capacity to influence the evolving dynamics of the IOR by fostering sustainable economic development, bolstering maritime security, diplomatically addressing regional challenges, and promoting cultural exchanges. Through coordinated action and leveraging their combined influence, BRICS nations can assume a central role in shaping a stable, prosperous, and inclusive new order in the IOR, benefiting all stakeholders.
The recent G20 summit culminated in a comprehensive declaration, addressing pressing global challenges while advocating for sustainable economic growth. Leaders committed to implementing the 2030 Agenda, championing low-carbon development, and urgently tackling climate and development issues. They pledged to enhance medical access in developing nations, address debt vulnerabilities, and accelerate progress toward Sustainable Development Goals. The imperative of meeting Paris Agreement objectives was underscored, alongside calls for reforms to enhance the effectiveness of multilateral development banks. Emphasis was placed on digital access and inclusion, sustainable employment, gender equality, and amplifying the voices of developing nations. This signals a dedication to a new world order centered on shared prosperity and global cooperation.
However, the paramount principle should be one of neutrality, eschewing involvement in extraregional affairs that could potentially expose the nation to vulnerabilities in the realms of politics, economy, and military affairs. Nonetheless, it remains imperative for Sri Lanka to demonstrate astuteness and vigilance in maintaining and actively engaging in diplomatic, commercial relations, and defense interactions to safeguard neutrality and assert its interests in the international arena.
As a sovereign nation-state, Sri Lanka bears a moral imperative to actively engage in global affairs, thereby contributing to regional and international peace and stability through robust cooperation, consultation, and dispute resolution mechanisms within the framework of the international rules-based system. Concurrently, it is imperative to oppose any unjust subsidies to the economy, discriminatory treatment, or restrictions on foreign capital, while steadfastly committing to rectifying unfair and unsustainable trade practices to foster prosperity within the region.
Furthermore, proactive measures must be undertaken to ensure that the IOR remains a bastion of stability, peace, and harmony for all stakeholders. By nurturing stability, peace, and harmony in the IOR, nations can unlock vast potential for cooperation, economic growth, and sustainable development. This ensures equitable access to shared resources, fortifies regional bonds, and effectively addresses common challenges. Commitments should be geared toward promoting freedom and openness as fundamental principles, aligning with the values and norms of the IOR. These include upholding the freedom of navigation, rejecting coercion, advocating for an open-market economy, and championing a private-enterprise-centric approach to bolster regional freedom, stability, and prosperity.
Central to this commitment is the establishment of a code of conduct for the IOR, incorporating confidence-building measures that guarantee all states the right to navigate and transit through these waters without undue interference, thereby fostering greater opportunities. Additionally, engagement with other regional and international organizations specializing in maritime affairs, such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the IORA, holds promise for leveraging their support and expertise in developing and implementing essential mechanisms.
Sri Lanka must adopt a bold and shrewd approach in pursuing sustainable economic development and addressing the impacts of climate change. The evolving new order in the IOR presents substantial economic opportunities and growth potential. Beyond being a mere body of water, the IOR serves as a vital lifeline for millions of people residing along its shores, linking diverse nations with a shared stake in harnessing its economic potential while safeguarding its ecological equilibrium.
Sustainable economic development transcends mere preference; it is an imperative. The IOR harbors significant reservoirs of natural resources, ranging from fisheries to minerals, poised to propel economic advancement. Additionally, boasting some of the world’s busiest shipping lanes, the IOR facilitates the movement of goods pivotal to global commerce and supply chains. The scope for trade and investment is vast, necessitating prudent utilization.
Nevertheless, the evolving new order in the IOR necessitates a mindful consideration of the environmental and social repercussions of economic pursuits. Economic growth that honors the fragile ecosystems of the oceans, preserves marine biodiversity, and mitigates the impacts of climate change is imperative. To strike a balance, the adoption of eco-friendly shipping technologies, reduction of emissions from maritime vessels, and stringent enforcement of regulations to prevent oil spills and other forms of pollution are indispensable. Sustainable fisheries management constitutes another pivotal dimension. Through the implementation of sustainable fishing practices, the ocean’s needs can be met, the livelihoods of coastal communities safeguarded, and the interests of future generations upheld.
Investments in renewable energy sources, both onshore and offshore—such as wind, solar power, biomass, and green hydrogen—can contribute to diminishing reliance on fossil fuels, thereby mitigating climate change and fostering sustainable development. Collaborative endeavors among Indian Ocean nations have the potential to culminate in the establishment of a regional renewable energy hub, benefiting all stakeholders.
Sri Lanka must adopt a holistic whole-of-government approach in collaboration with international and multinational stakeholders to enhance capabilities and capacities across critical domains. These include maritime domain awareness, maritime safety, maritime security, enforcement of customs and maritime law, protection of natural resources, maritime search and rescue, disaster response, and port operations and security. Initiating this process entails conducting a comprehensive comparative risk assessment, considering hazard criteria such as chemical fires on-board vessels, oil spills, maritime pollution, social unrest, terrorism/extremist attacks, floods, landslides, piracy, and smuggling of narcotics, humans, and arms. Factors such as historical frequency, vulnerability, maximum threat, and probability must be meticulously evaluated.
A prudent and evidence-based evaluation of threats and vulnerabilities vis-à-vis existing capabilities is imperative for accurately assessing current and potential risks. Recent incidents, such as the MV Express Pearl disaster, underscore the magnitude and severity of such eventualities.
Focal Areas of Interests in the Maritime Domain
- Maritime Domain Awareness—Achieved through patrols, surveillance, technical monitoring, and information sharing.
- Maritime Safety—Ensured through inspection, maritime safety laws, boating safety regulations, and education.
- Maritime Security—Maintained through military training and readiness, interoperability, tactical assets, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities and capacity, and coordination with partner agencies and neighboring countries.
- Enforcement of Customs and Maritime Law—Implemented through laws and regulations, equipment, law enforcement training, interdiction capability, and seizure rate.
- Protection of Natural Resources (internal, territorial, and exclusive economic zone enforcement)—Managed through fisheries-related training, enforcement of laws, and international agreements.
- Maritime Search and Rescue—Conducted through capability, assets, training, communications, and international agreements.
- Disaster Response—Executed through environmental disaster prevention, response training, exercises, mitigation, and inter-agency / international coordination.
- Port Operations and Security—Ensured through the effectiveness of Port Authority agencies, maintenance of facilities, security of facilities, cyber security, and international agreements/treaties.
These focal areas should also prioritize Sri Lanka’s engagement and collaboration with industry stakeholders within the maritime sector. Proactive and pragmatic interventions and dialogues in the maritime sphere are essential for being cognizant of both observables—such as vessels, individuals, facilities, sea lanes, threats, and friendly forces—and non-observables, including financial transactions and communications. Establishing and leveraging these lines of communication are crucial for realizing the desired outcomes outlined earlier. Such initiatives are indispensable for addressing challenges that may emerge in “ungoverned maritime spaces” within the IOR, where concerns about “dark shipping” have emerged as of late.[17] This represents a novel approach that has been overlooked for decades.
Conclusion
Sri Lanka, as an island nation, holds a profound connection to the maritime domain. However, the absence of a coherent, unified, and actionable policy has resulted in missed opportunities. The repercussions of past disastrous decisions and strategic missteps since 1948 are manifesting in the present. Therefore, the timely pursuit of formulating the Sri Lankan IOR policy addresses a fundamental flaw that has hindered the nation's ability to pursue prosperity, progress, security, and contentment as both a sovereign state and a maritime stakeholder.
The proposed five-pronged approach does not claim to be the ultimate solution, but rather an endeavor to bridge the gap that has paralyzed the state's pursuit of a pragmatic developmental trajectory over the years. In essence, Sri Lanka must utilize the IOR policy/strategy to advance its interests in emerging as a regional middle power across economic, political, social, and military spheres. While this aspiration is fraught with challenges given prevailing competition, demand dynamics, and a comparatively small domestic market, maintaining optimism is crucial to extracting optimal benefits from presented opportunities. Leveraging available resources such as instruments of power, educational infrastructure, human capital, and geographical advantages proves advantageous in this pursuit. ♦
CDR CRP Walakuluge, Sri Lanka Navy
Commander Walakuluge has nearly two decades of operational, staff, and administrative experiences in the Sri Lanka Navy. Since 2016, he has also served as a senior fellow with the Sri Lankan Institute of National Security Studies (INSS). Further, he is also a recipient of the Lee Foundation Scholarship and obtained his Master in Public Administration (MPA) from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore in 2019. He is also a former spokesperson for the Sri Lanka Navy and a founding editor of the defence.lk web portal.
CDR BARI Abeysekara, Sri Lanka Navy, Retired
Retired Commander Abeysekara is a prospective doctoral student at University of New South Wales, Canberra, Australia. He served in the Sri Lanka Navy for nearly 22 years and retired in April 2024. He holds three masters degrees: a Masters in Conflict and Peace Studies from the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka; a Master of Engineering in Naval Weapon Science Technology from Naval University of Engineering, Wuhan, China; and a Master of Science in Defence and Strategic Studies from General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, Sri Lanka. He earned his BS from Goa University, India, in 2005. He also holds a PG Diploma in Defence Management from General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, Sri Lanka.