The following editorial is published on BairdMaritime.com with permission from Senator Khun Wicharn Sirichai-Ekawat, Managing Director of Sirichai Fisheries. The company's vessel 'Ekawatnava 5' was sunk by the Indian frigate 'INS Tabar', which claimed victory for sinking a "pirate mother ship". Khun Wicharn questions their motives and excuses:
On November 19, 2008, India claimed victory that its Navy frigate 'INS Tabar' had gunned down a Somali pirate "mother ship". They claimed that this "mother ship" had been routinely hijacking other vessels along the Somali coast and the Gulf of Aden. The international media, with increasing scrutiny, have covered these acts of piracy. As a result, the Indian government gained considerable credit from the global nations.
However, it was found later that the sunken vessel was actually a Thai-owned fishing vessel, flying the Kiribati flag. The vessel had been hijacked by Somali pirates off the coast of Yemen on the morning of November 18, 2008, with the intention of the crew being held for ransom. However the fishing vessel was sunk by the 'Tabar' on the evening of the same day. It caused the deaths of 14 Thai crewmembers, and only one Cambodian crewmember was found alive after floating for five days and four nights at sea. This sole survivor has now been able to tell the world about the cruel and inhumane action of the Indian frigate, which claimed to be a "hero" because they thought that nobody would survive the sinking of the vessel.
To support our claim, there are many points which must be clarified by the Indian authorities:
As mentioned in the Indian official announcement, the fishing vessel was described similarly as a pirate "mother ship" in various bulletins. This is false, as no evidence has been provided by Indian officials to prove this to Sirichai Fisheries Co.
The fact is that the vessel was really 'Ekawatnava 5', a Thai-owned vessel operated by Sirichai Fisheries Co., Thailand. Sirichai Fisheries informed the International Maritime Bureau (IMB) in Malaysia of its hijacking on the morning of November 18, 2008. Through our rapid correspondence, the identification of the vessel, photo and location were sent to concerned navies which were operating in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. It is impossible that the Indian frigate would not have been informed because the time elapsed between the hijacking and the sinking of 'Ekawatnava 5' was ten hours.
Mentioned also in the same announcement, the Indian authorities indicated that at the time of the attack its position was in the high sea, and distanced 285 NM south-west from the port of Salalah in Oman. This is misleading the whole world on the actual position of the vessel. The Indian frigate must have realised that the incident took place within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Yemen. Since the position is not far beyond 100 NM from Yemen coast, it is not the "high seas" as claimed by Indian authorities. If the nearest city of Yemen was specified, the mariners would have identified that the activities of the Indian Navy were illegal within Yemeni waters. By law, the Indian frigate was not allowed to open fire as it was not in Indian waters nor even on the "high seas". Nor was the Indian frigate in Somali waters, in which Coalition warships are allowed to operate.
Mentioned in the same announcement, the Indian authorities claimed that the supposed pirate "mother ship" was full of provisions and had explosives on board. Without boarding for investigation, how can it be simply assumed that the explosion was caused by ammunition and explosives on board the vessel? The fact was that the explosion was caused by the Indian Navy's shots to the fuel tank of 'Ekawatnava 5'.
According to the picture of the 'Ekawatnava 5' released by Indian authorities, the vessel could not have been sunk as the blaze was only on the upper part of the vessel. Since it was a steel vessel, it would have been able to keep afloat unless the Indian Navy continued firing at it, with the intention of sinking the evidence.
It is quite simple to determine why the Indian frigate was determined to sink the fishing vessel. In recent times, many Indian vessels have been terrorised by Somali pirates and even more recently, Indian crew onboard a Japanese national ship were released after ransom was paid. These factors could have led the Indian frigate into feelings of deep contempt and dissatisfaction. Also, as no warships operating in the region had so far been able to sink a pirate vessel, the Indian Navy would have been praised internationally after such an announcement. Unfortunately, the target was an innocent fishing vessel.
Moreover, the Indian authorities announced that the frigate gave chase to the two pirate speed boats which fled the scene after the explosion. This obviously shows that the Indian frigate did not consider anyone's life worth saving, even if they were pirates with criminal intentions.
In an interrogation of the one surviving crewmember, it is believed that the frigate saw the 'Ekawatnava 5' at dawn and saw that the pirates were using the innocent crewmembers as "human shields". In the late evening, the frigate returned to open fire, knowing fully that there were innocent men on board, and that it was not a pirate ship. If this is true, their actions show the cruelty and carelessness of the Indian Navy.
According to above information and assumptions, it is hardly convincing that 'Tabar' sank 'Ekawatnava 5' in Yemeni waters because the fishing vessel was mistaken for a pirate "mother ship". Otherwise, the Indian frigate is requested to prove itself by providing us with evidence such as pictures and particulars of the mentioned pirate "mother ship". The logbook, route map and the original "operational record" (not the revised one) of the 'Tabar' should also be provided.
In addition, we would like to know how the Indian authorities responded to the fact that the Indian frigate has violated the law of Yemen by murdering 14 Thai crew and sinking one Thai-owned fishing vessel within Yemeni waters – not in Indian waters or on the high seas.
The Indian authorities must accept that they are in the wrong, show some responsibility and offer a remedy and compensation to the affected people.
The United Nations is requested to investigate the case in order to reverse this heroic image of the 'Tabar' and replace it with a more accurate depiction. Also, the UN should set penalties and have a more preventive approach to protect innocent victims against such future incidents."
Sirichai Fisheries Co.
