Where Is The Anti-Piracy Escort Force?: The Crisis In The Red Sea Exposes Chinese Inaction – Analysis

The Red Sea, a critical maritime route linking Europe to Asia, has recently become a flashpoint of instability. As political turmoil and piracy incidents surge, the need for robust maritime security has never been more urgent. Yet, amid this crisis, China’s Anti-Piracy Escort Force (APEF), which has been a symbol of Beijing’s expanding naval influence, is conspicuously absent. This absence not only raises questions about China’s commitment to global maritime security, but also offers a stark contrast to the Indian Navy’s proactive and consistent efforts in the region.

Strategic Importance of the Red Sea

The Red Sea is one of the most crucial maritime corridors in the world, serving as a vital artery for global trade. It connects the Mediterranean Sea to the Indian Ocean through the Suez Canal, making it a key route for energy supplies and commercial goods between Europe and Asia. The region’s strategic significance is further amplified by its proximity to major conflict zones in the Middle East, making it a focal point for international security efforts.

Historically, the Red Sea and the adjacent Gulf of Aden have been plagued by piracy, with Somali pirates at one time dominating the headlines with their brazen attacks on commercial vessels. In response, the international community, including China, deployed naval forces to safeguard these waters. China’s APEF was established in 2008 as part of these international anti-piracy efforts, marking Beijing’s growing interest in securing global maritime routes that are vital to its economic interests.

The Red Sea Crisis and Its Implications

The current crisis in the Red Sea is a complex amalgamation of geopolitical tensions, regional conflicts and a resurgence of piracy. The Israel-Hamas war has further destabilized the region, with Iran-backed Houthi rebels from Yemen launching attacks on vessels, including those belonging to India. These developments have escalated the risks for commercial shipping and prompted increased naval activity from various nations to ensure the safety of maritime routes.

The Indian Navy has responded robustly to this crisis, ramping up its patrols in the Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean. At the height of the Red Sea crisis, the number of Indian Navy warships on patrol increased from just two to 12, a clear indication of India’s commitment to maintaining maritime security in the region. In contrast, the absence of China’s APEF in these troubled waters is both puzzling and telling.

Strategic Caution or Missed Opportunity?

China’s absence from the Red Sea crisis could be a strategic decision, reflecting Beijing’s cautious approach to entanglement in the region’s complex conflicts. Some analysts suggest that this absence might be a subtle way of supporting the Houthis, an Iranian proxy group that controls vast areas of Yemen. By staying out of the conflict, China may be indirectly aiding Iran’s regional ambitions while countering the influence of other powers in the Red Sea.

China’s relationship with Iran is deeply rooted in mutual economic interests, particularly through illicit oil trade. Beijing is the largest buyer of Iranian oil, bypassing US sanctions and fulfilling a significant portion of its energy needs. This economic interdependence could explain why China has been hesitant to antagonize the Houthis, who have notably avoided targeting Chinese ships in their Red Sea campaign.

Moreover, China’s reluctance to join a US-led maritime coalition against the Houthis might also reflect its desire to avoid aligning with Washington’s interests. As America’s chief geopolitical rival, Beijing is keen to maintain its strategic autonomy, even if it means risking its image as a global maritime power. Other possible reasons for China’s absence include a focus on more immediate threats in the South China Sea or Indo-Pacific, resource limitations and the operational challenges posed by the complex security environment in the Red Sea.

However, this calculated absence could have significant implications for China’s global standing. The lack of Chinese presence may be perceived as a sign of limited engagement in regional security, potentially damaging its reputation as a responsible global player. Furthermore, this vacuum could create opportunities for other naval powers, such as India and the European Union, to increase their influence in the region.

Indian Navy’s Proactive Role in Red Sea

In stark contrast to China’s inaction, the Indian Navy has demonstrated its commitment to maritime security through a series of daring operations in the Red Sea, Arabian Sea and Gulf of Aden. India’s increasing naval presence in these waters, particularly in response to the Red Sea crisis, underscores its role as a reliable ‘Guardian of the Seas’.

Recent operations have highlighted the Indian Navy’s formidable capabilities:

• The MV Leela Norfolk (January 5): The Indian Navy thwarted a hijacking attempt on the Liberian-flagged MV Leela Norfolk in the north Arabian Sea. The operation, led by the elite Indian Marine Commandos (MarCos), resulted in the safe rescue of all 21 members of the crew
• The MV Genco Picardy (January 18): Following a drone attack in the Gulf of Aden, the Indian Navy secured the vessel and ensured the safety of its 22 members of the crew, including nine Indians
• The MV Marlin Luanda (January 26): The INS Vishakhapatnam responded to a distress call from the MV Marlin Luanda. A firefighting team of 10 personnel battled for six hours to extinguish the fire, demonstrating the navy’s capability to handle maritime emergencies
• The MV Iman & Lorenzo Pua 04 (January 28): The Indian Navy’s INS Sumitra and INS Sharda successfully rescued members of the crew from Iranian and Sri Lankan-flagged vessels hijacked by Somali pirates, showcasing the navy’s anti-piracy capabilities
• The MV Al-Naimi (January 29): The INS Sumitra intercepted the Iranian-flagged fishing vessel, the Al-Naimi, rescuing 19 Pakistani nationals held hostage by Somali pirates, highlighting the navy’s commitment to humanitarian efforts despite geopolitical tensions

These operations, led by MarCos, have demonstrated the Indian Navy’s ability to respond swiftly, and effectively, to maritime threats. The increase in the number of Indian warships patrolling the region from two to 12 is a clear reflection of India’s proactive stance in maintaining maritime security.

The Indian Navy’s approach combines principles, skills and military might, making it an undisputed ‘Guardian of the Seas’. This combination not only enhances India’s credibility as a reliable security partner, but also solidifies its position as a key player in ensuring the stability of critical maritime routes.

China’s decision to stay out of the Red Sea crisis seems to be a calculated move, likely based on a combination of strategic prioritization, resource management and political caution. While this approach might help China avoid entanglement in a complex conflict, it could also expose its interests to risks and diminish its standing as a global power willing to contribute to regional stability.

In stark contrast, the Indian Navy’s proactive and consistent efforts highlight its commitment to ensuring maritime security. Through a series of daring operations, India has not only protected its own interests, but also contributed to the safety of international maritime routes. This stark difference in approaches underscores the importance of being a reliable and responsible player in global maritime security, a role that India is increasingly making its own.