US Sinking Of Iranian Warship IRIS Dena Raises International Law Questions

Recently, an Iranian warship identified as Frigate IRIS Dena was torpedoed by a United States submarine near the coast of Galle in Sri Lanka. Reportedly, the Sri Lankan Navy received a distress call and rescued 32 injured sailors within their search and rescue zone, while more than 80 bodies were discovered.After the incident, the United States Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, in a press briefing, said: “An American submarine sunk an Iranian warship that though it was safe in international waters. Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo.”The warship was heading back to Iran from a global naval exercise, International Fleet Review, hosted by India in Visakhapatnam. Some sources suggest that it was invited by Sri Lanka for a courtesy port call but amidst the escalating tensions, it was instructed suddenly to not proceed. Because of the diplomatic shift, it waited for 11 hours in international waters before being attacked by the US Navy.This incident raises many questions of international law, such as whether the ship was a legitimate target, whether it was in a warzone and whether it could have been attacked in international waters. All these questions assume significance, particularly in the backdrop of an undeclared “preemptive” war by the United States and Israel against Iran. This piece explains these nuances. What is Frigate IRIS Dena?Frigate IRIS Dena is a domestically built warship, equipped with modern anti-ship “Qader” missiles and a vertical launching system. It becomes the second warship to be torpedoed by a submarine since the World War II. The first was an Indian anti-submarine frigate INS Khukri, which was torpedoed by Pakistan's PNS Hangor during the 1971 India-Pakistan war.Reportedly, the fleet exercise required the ship to be unarmed, and therefore, weapon systems were kept in a non-operational mode. Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi responded to the incident, saying that the warship was a “guest of India's Navy carrying almost 130 sailors” and it was “struck in international waters without warning”. Araghchi had said that the ship mostly had non-combatants and ceremonial staff. Dr Brahma Chellaney, Indian Geostrategist, on X(formerly Twitter) said that in multilateral naval exercises focused on camaraderie and collaboration do not carry a full combat load of live ammunitions as a matter of "peace protocols". The naval exercise was carried out in many phases. It began with the harbour phase followed by sea phase, which included "high-intensity operational drills" such as integrated air defence exercises, anti-submarine warfare operations and maritime interdictions drills. Then in the operational phase, live firing exercises are conducted as reported in Times of India.Chellaney added that in its harbor phase, participating ships are required to maintain a safe configuration. Even during the sea phase, where operational drills and live-fire events occur, the ammunition carried is limited to specific drills. Which law applies?It must first be noted that for the US to officially go to war, it requires a prior sanction from the US Congress under the War Powers Resolution, 1973. In order to skip this, US Presidents often invoke their Commander-in-Chief powers under Article II of the US Constitution and take the controversial route of “preemptive self-defence” or “anticipatory self-defence” in response to a sudden and imminent threat. Even then, Congress must be notified within 48 hours of the hostilities.Under Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, the use of force is prohibited. However, Article 51 is considered an exception to Article 2(4). A non-obstante clause, Article 51, allows States to act in individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack has occurred in its traditional understanding. However, States now increasingly use force under anticipatory self-defence to justify that they had to act first against an “imminent threat”.This doctrine traces its roots to the 1837 Caroline affair, which was a diplomatic incident which took place between the US and the United Kingdom. It may be recalled that Canada was one of the colonies of France, which was won over by the British government in the Seven Years' War. In 1837, there was a rebellion in Upper Canada against the British colonisers. After the movement suffered defeat, leaders of the uprising fled to Navy Island in the Niagara River and declared their own territory and received support from American sympathisers. The sympathisers delivered support to the Island by steamboat named Caroline. During the night of December 29, 1837, the British and Canadian authorities crossed into US territory and destroyed Caroline and set her on fire. In this exchange, an American bystander was also killed. Although the incident was settled during diplomatic negotiations, the Caroline test came to be known in a series of letters exchanged between the then US Secretary of State and the then British Foreign Minister. The US counterpart stated...

US Sinking Of Iranian Warship IRIS Dena Raises International Law Questions

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

US Sinking Of Iranian Warship IRIS Dena Raises International Law Questions

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers