The Indian Ocean de fines a distinctive region in international politics. Some thirty-six nations of Africa and Asia and the continent of Australia constitue the littoral and hinterland states of the region.
After World War II, the decolonization process ended British hegemony in the Indian Ocean. Superpower competition began to escalate. The Indian Ocean became a strategic area of importance to both superpowers, the USA and the USSR.
Besides the superpowers, France, Britain, Japan, and China have substantial interests in the Indian Ocean region. Reunion, near Mauritius, and the island of Mayotte in the Comoros are administratively parts of France. Britain has a range of political, economic, and strategic concerns in the region. The British-owned Diego Garcia has been used by the US to project American power into the Indian Ocean.
Zone of Peace
The proposal that the Indian Ocean be declared a Zone of Peace emphasized the strategic importance of the Indian Ocean region. This idea was originally advocated by Sri Lanka during the twenty-sixth session of the UN General Assembly in 1971. The UN adopted a resolution 2832 (XXVI), co-sponsored by Sri Lanka and Tanzania, supporting the proposal and called upon interested states to enter into consultations to implement it.
The vision behind the proposal was provided by Sri Lanka's Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike, who told a Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Singapore in Janurary 1971: A Peace Zone in the Indian Ocean will provide countries of this region with time to develop trends towards integration and co-operation so that in course of time the Indian Ocean region could move from an area of low solidarity to an area of high solidarity.In declaring the Indian Ocean for all time as a zone of peace, the General Assembly resolution called upon the great powers to enter into immediate consultations with the littoral states of the Indian Ocean with a view to (a) halting the further escalation and expansion of their military presence in the Indian Ocean, and (b) eliminating from the Indian Ocean all bases, military installations and logistical supply facilities, the disposition of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, and any manifestations of great power military presence in the Indian Ocean in the context of great power rivarly.
Further, resolution 2832 (XXVI) called upon the littoral and hinterland states of the Indian Ocean, the permanent members of the Security Council and other major maritime users of the Indian Ocean, to take such action as to ensure that warships and military aircraft may not use the Indian Ocean for any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of any littoral or hinterland state of the Indian Ocean. The resolution also provided for The right to free and unimpeded use of the zone by the vessels of all nations.
Ad hoc committee
In 1972, the UN General Assembly appointed an Ad Hoc Committee (AHC) on the Indian Ocean to consider ways of implementing the zone of peace resolution, with Sri Lanka as the Chairman of the Committee, a position that Sri Lanka has continued to hold until the present.
The AHC met each year and, as part of its activities, decided to hold a meeting of the littoral and hinterland states of the Indian Ocean in New York in 1979. The outcome of this meeting was a Declaration of seven principles. By this time, India was well on the way towards becoming a nuclear power and expressed reservations on some of the seven principles adopted. At its annual session in 1980, the General Assembly adopted a resolution requesting the AHC to arrange for a conference to be held in Colombo in 1981. The AHC's immediate task thereafter was to draft an agenda and rules of procedure for such a conference.
By 1990, the cold war was ending. The Soviet empire in Eastern Europe was distintegrating and the dissolution of the USSR itself was in progress. In 1991, when I became chairman of the AHC, the committees work was bogged down. An agenda for the Colombo Conference had been adopted by the rules of procedure were not complete. The western powers had left and the major maritime powers were no longer participating in the work of the AHC.
By the end of 1991, the rules of procedure had been completed but India resisted the holding of a conference in Colombo in 1992, arguing that such a conference could only be held with the active participation of all the permanent members of the Security Council and the major maritime powers. India maintained that, without their full co-operation, any decisions taken at a conference in Colombo could not be implemented. India continued to insist that all foreign bases be removed from the Indian Ocean region.
Conference abandoned
By the early 1990s, however, the international polilitical situation was fast changing, rivarly between the great powers had ceased, and these powers felt that the goals of the original Declaration of 1971, were no longer valid since the bases in the Indian Ocean no longer existed in the context of great power rivalry
On the other hand, the majority of members of the AHC thought that the goals of 1971 were still valid. Accordingly, the General Assembly in 1992 decided that the AHC, at its session in 1993, should consider new alternative ways to achieve the goals of peace, security and stability in the Indian ocean.
The AHC's session in 1993 was a watershed. Instead of futile preparations for a conference in Colombo, as was done previously, the AHC agreed that a step-by-step approach be adopted to reach the goals of the IOZP and that confidence-building measures should be the first step. The US, UK, and France still remained outside the committee but countries like Norway, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy attended the meetings. Australia resumed full participation and rejoined the Bureau of the AHC as a Vice-Chairman.
New approaches
India continued to insist on the inviolability of the goals of the 1971 Declaration. The exchanges between India and Pakistan became increasingly acrimonious, Pakistan insisting on the applicability of the seven-point Declaration of 1979, which advocated a regional approach to acheiving the goals of 1971. The report of the AHC for 1993 set both Declarations (1971 and 1979) in their historical perspective and agreed to consider the non-military aspects of security, like arms and drug trafficking, environmental hazards and the economic development of the marine resources of the Indian Ocean.
The usefulness of keeping the AHC on the agenda of the General Assembly has now to be seriously considered by Sri Lanka in consultation with India and the permanent members of the Security Council. During the term of the last government, there was a reluctance to take a bipartisan view by discussing the need for pursuing the goals of the 1971 Declaration in the parliamentary consultative committee on foreign affaris.
At a time when the UN General Assembly is streamlining its agenda and taking steps to revitalise its work, the removal of items which lead nowhere would be imperative. Sri Lanka could contribute to this process by agreeing to phase out the IOZP which, in terms of the Declaration of 1971, has lost all relevance.
Return to the Editorial/Opinion contents page