UNCLOS Must Evolve to Counter 21st-Century Maritime Coercion, Says Diplomat

Former Indian diplomat Sanjay Kumar Verma argues the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is strategically insufficient for modern challenges. He cites the Strait of Hormuz, Taiwan Strait, and South China Sea as examples where legal rights are compromised by geography, sovereignty disputes, and lack of enforcement. Verma stresses that UNCLOS remains irreplaceable but cannot rely on principles alone in an era of coercion and strategic signaling. The solution lies in reinforcing it with robust compliance mechanisms and deeper international cooperation to defend the maritime legal order.

Key Points: Strengthening UNCLOS for Modern Maritime Challenges

  • Strait of Hormuz shows legal rights vulnerable to coercion
  • Taiwan Strait highlights compromised navigational freedoms
  • South China Sea reveals lack of ruling implementation
  • UNCLOS principles sound but enforcement insufficient
3 min read

'UNCLOS needs strengthening to meet 21st-century maritime challenges'

Former diplomat Sanjay Kumar Verma argues UNCLOS needs robust enforcement to counter coercion in global chokepoints like Hormuz and Taiwan.

"The crisis of UNCLOS is not that the law is absent, but that law, by itself, is no longer enough. - Sanjay Kumar Verma"

New Delhi, March 26

Reimagining the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is not about drafting a new constitution for the seas but about rescuing the existing one from strategic insufficiency, a report said on Thursday.

Writing for 'India Narrative', former Indian diplomat Sanjay Kumar Verma said that the Strait of Hormuz underscores how geography can make settled legal rights vulnerable to coercion. He stated that the developments in the Taiwan Strait highlighted that navigational freedoms can be compromised when law becomes entangled into sovereignty disputes and strategic signalling.

Additionally, the South China Sea, Verma said, demonstrates most clearly that a binding legal ruling without consistent implementation cannot restore order.

The former Indian diplomat stressed that the UNCLOS stands as one of the most ambitious achievements of post-war international diplomacy.

"It gave the oceans a legal order where earlier there had been overlapping claims, uneven practice, and the constant temptation to let raw power settle contested questions. It balanced the rights of coastal states with the needs of maritime powers and offered a framework within which navigation, resource use, marine research, and dispute settlement could be managed with a measure of predictability. Even today, despite all the strain visible across the world's most contested waters, there is no viable substitute for it," Verma detailed, highlighting the significance of UNCLOS.

"Yet if one wishes to understand why UNCLOS now appears insufficient in practice, the clearest point of departure is the Strait of Hormuz. Transit passage is protected in law, yet geography still enables coercive leverage. Threats of disruption resonate immediately through energy markets and shipping calculations, and legal entitlement alone does not neutralise the strategic value of a chokepoint. The crisis of UNCLOS is not that the law is absent, but that law, by itself, is no longer enough where coercive capability and strategic location combine," he added.

According to Verma, UNCLOS was framed in an era when codified rules were expected to shape state behaviour over time. That belief persists, but it no longer holds the same force. The solution, he said, does not lie in abandoning UNCLOS but in reinforcing it with robust compliance mechanisms, tighter interpretive discipline, and deeper bilateral, minilateral, and plurilateral cooperation.

"If the twenty-first century is not to drift toward a maritime order shaped increasingly by intimidation, ambiguity, and incremental fait accompli, the law of the sea must enter a second phase of life. Its principles remain sound. What no longer suffices is the assumption that sound principles will enforce themselves. The task now is to ensure that the legal order at sea is matched by a political and operational order willing to defend it," the seasoned diplomat wrote.

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priyanka N
Completely agree that the principles are sound but enforcement is weak. Look at the fishing disputes with our neighbours. Small fishermen get caught in the middle while big powers play strategic games. The law needs teeth, especially to protect the rights of coastal states.
R
Robert G
Interesting perspective from an Indian diplomat. The mention of "minilateral" cooperation is key. Instead of waiting for global consensus, regional powers like India, Japan, Australia need to work together to uphold maritime law in the Indo-Pacific. QUAD is a step in that direction.
A
Anjali F
The article is insightful, but I feel it's a bit idealistic. When has international law ever stopped a powerful nation determined to expand its influence? Look at the history. Strengthening UNCLOS is important, but we must also significantly build our own naval capabilities. Jai Hind!
K
Karthik V
"Law, by itself, is no longer enough." This is the hard truth. We see it in our own backyard. The solution lies in diplomacy backed by credible deterrence. India should take a leadership role in building this new "operational order" for the Indian Ocean region.
M
Michelle N
As someone who works in shipping logistics, the stability of sea lanes is everything. A dispute in the Strait of Hormuz sends insurance costs soaring and disrupts global supply chains overnight. A stronger, actionable UNCLOS isn't just geopolitics; it's economic necessity.

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50