'Global South bears burden': EAM flags attacks on Indian seafarers in Hormuz at G20 meet

Two tankers were targeted in separate attacks in the Strait of Hormuz. Liberia-flagged VLCC MT ARZANAH was attacked on October 29 while carrying two Indian nationals. Panama-flagged crude oil tanker MT LOUISE 1 was targeted on October 30 while carrying 27 Indian seafarers. The incidents raised concerns about civilian shipping and crew safety.

The article describes projectile attacks on both vessels. It separately reports that MT LOUISE 1 was targeted with limpet mines, marking the first known successful use of those explosives in the area since the US-Iran war began in February. Such attacks can threaten crews, ships, and vital trade routes.

Union minister Sarbananda Sonowal said all 29 Indian seafarers aboard the two tankers were safe, with no injuries. The incidents prompted External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar to call for protecting freedom of navigation and ending attacks under international law, especially UNCLOS. India and Liberia also launched a joint initiative to safeguard seafarers.

A limpet mine is a compact explosive designed to attach to a vessel’s hull, commonly using magnets or other clamps. It is usually placed below the waterline, where an explosion can damage the ship’s structure. The weapon is especially dangerous because it can be difficult to detect before detonation.

When it explodes, the blast can tear or puncture the hull. Water may enter the vessel, while shock waves can damage engines, pipes, electrical systems, or fuel tanks. A damaged fuel tank can also create a fire or pollution risk. The exact damage depends on the mine’s size, location, and the ship’s construction.

The article says MT LOUISE 1 was targeted with limpet mines in the Strait of Hormuz. It calls this the first known successful use of the explosives there since the US-Iran war began in February. The report does not identify who placed the mines or describe the vessel’s damage.

The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow maritime passage between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. It connects energy-producing states around the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea and global shipping routes. Its geography concentrates a large amount of commercial traffic into a relatively limited corridor.

Civilian tankers use the strait to carry crude oil, refined fuels, liquefied natural gas, and other goods. A disruption can force ships to wait, reroute, or pay more for insurance and security. Even when vessels continue moving, the perceived danger can raise transport costs and make deliveries less predictable.

The article shows the human risk through attacks on MT ARZANAH and MT LOUISE 1. It says the Global South is disproportionately bearing the consequences, including threats to fuel, food, and fertiliser availability and prices. Jaishankar therefore urged an end to attacks and protection for freedom of navigation.

The article does not quantify the strait’s normal energy traffic. Established estimates from the US Energy Information Administration commonly put flows at about one-fifth of global petroleum consumption, or roughly 20 million barrels per day in recent years. Around one-fifth of global liquefied natural gas trade has also passed through the waterway.

These figures matter because the strait handles a concentrated share of energy transported by sea. A closure, attack, or sustained security scare could delay tankers and force some cargoes onto longer routes. Buyers may compete for fewer available shipments, while shipowners and insurers may charge more for using the route.

The article focuses on the consequences rather than a global percentage. Jaishankar said attacks on civilian shipping were jeopardising the availability and cost of fuel, food, and fertilisers. Because energy supports transport, farming, manufacturing, and trade, disruption can spread beyond the shipping industry, especially in the Global South.

Attacks on ships can disrupt the movement of energy and goods even when vessels are not destroyed. Operators may delay voyages, reroute ships, or demand higher insurance and security costs. Those extra expenses can enter the prices paid for fuel, food, and fertilisers. Fewer reliable deliveries can also create local shortages.

The mechanism is tightly connected. More expensive fuel raises transport and production costs. Fertiliser shortages or higher prices can make farming more expensive and reduce crop output. Food prices may then rise. Countries that depend heavily on imported energy, farm inputs, or food face the greatest pressure when shipping becomes unsafe.

Jaishankar said the Global South was disproportionately bearing these consequences. He specifically warned that attacks in the Middle East were threatening the availability and cost of fuel, food, and fertilisers. Protecting civilian shipping and freedom of navigation is therefore an economic issue as well as a security concern.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, provides the legal framework for maritime navigation. For international straits used by ships between areas of the high seas or exclusive economic zones, it recognises transit passage. This passage must not be suspended, and coastal states must not hamper it.

Ships exercising transit passage must proceed continuously and expeditiously and refrain from threats or force against states. They must also follow relevant safety and pollution rules. Coastal states may adopt certain nondiscriminatory regulations, but they cannot use them to block lawful passage. Attacks on civilian vessels violate the broader duty to respect international law.

The article does not quote specific UNCLOS provisions or assign responsibility for the attacks. It reports that Jaishankar called for freedom of navigation and cessation of attacks within international law, especially UNCLOS. India and Liberia have launched a joint initiative to safeguard seafarers, showing the issue has both legal and practical dimensions.

Global supply chains connect ships with factories, farms, energy systems, and consumers. Ships carry fuel, raw materials, machinery, food, and fertilisers between countries. Industries depend on those inputs arriving on time and at manageable prices. Manufacturers also need reliable routes to export finished products and reach markets.

The mechanism is cumulative. A dangerous route can delay cargoes, raise insurance and transport costs, or force longer journeys. Higher energy and input prices make production less competitive. If markets are flooded, access is restricted, or supply chains are weaponised, local industries can face additional pressure. These effects can limit a country’s ability to industrialise.

Jaishankar said the right to industrialise was being undermined by market flooding, weaponised supply chains, restricted market access, and market distortions. He also linked shipping attacks to fuel, food, and fertiliser risks. Protecting navigation and keeping trade open therefore supports both immediate supply security and longer-term industrial growth.