Dilemmas of neutrality as war breaks out at sea

The sinking of an Iranian naval warship in the eastern Indian Ocean offers a stark reminder of how quickly the comfortable assumptions of peacetime maritime diplomacy collapse once war begins.

- 

The IRIS Dena had reportedly left Visakhapatnam well before hostilities broke out. Yet by the time it was transiting the Indian Ocean, it had become a hunted ship. A US submarine torpedoed it about 40 nautical miles south of Galle, in waters within Sri Lanka’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), but legally open to foreign military operations.

The episode has exacted a heavy human toll. Of a crew strength of 187, 87 are reportedly dead. Officers and sailors who only days earlier had participated in a multinational naval exercise suddenly found themselves the victims of a war they had likely only just begun to comprehend. Their fate reflects the unforgiving logic of naval warfare: Once hostilities begin, adversary assets in international waters become legitimate targets.

The incident also highlights the uncomfortable dilemmas war imposes on neutral States. Countries that are not party to a conflict often find themselves drawn into its operational geography, facing consequences they never anticipated. As belligerents contest the seas, neutrals must scrupulously maintain equal distance from both sides.

The fate of the IRIS Dena illustrates this dilemma. Having sailed from India well before the fighting began, the ship found itself navigating an ocean that had become operationally hostile. Its crew likely knew that the surrounding waters offered little protection — and that nearby States could not readily provide sanctuary without risking the appearance of taking sides. Reports suggest India did offer the Dena temporary refuge before the attack, and that another Iranian warship, the IRIS Lavan, docked at Kochi a day after the Dena was torpedoed. Why the Dena’s captain did not accept the Indian offer remains unclear.