✍️ adv Amaresh Kumar Yadav ( Supreme court of India)

The escalating confrontation involving Iran, Israel, and the United States in March 2026 has triggered a complex geopolitical and legal crisis in West Asia. While the military and economic consequences of the conflict are widely discussed, the situation also raises profound questions under international law—particularly concerning maritime navigation, use of force, sovereignty, and the protection of neutral states’ interests. For India, which depends heavily on maritime trade routes through the Persian Gulf, the crisis must be examined not only from a strategic perspective but also through the framework of international law.

The Strait of Hormuz and the Principle of Freedom of Navigation

The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints. Under international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), straits used for international navigation enjoy the regime of “transit passage.” This principle allows vessels and aircraft of all states to pass through such straits without prior authorization from the coastal state, provided that such passage is continuous and expeditious.

Iran’s reported assertion that vessels must obtain prior permission before transiting the Strait of Hormuz raises significant legal questions. If enforced, such a requirement would potentially conflict with the established doctrine of transit passage under UNCLOS. While Iran has historically maintained reservations about certain provisions of the convention, customary international law generally recognizes the freedom of navigation in international straits.

From the perspective of international law scholars, attempts to restrict navigation in such waterways could be interpreted as interference with lawful maritime passage and may provoke broader international disputes.

The Use of Force and the IRIS Dena Incident

The reported sinking of the Iranian naval vessel IRIS Dena near Sri Lanka introduces another dimension to the legal debate: the legality of the use of force under international law.

Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, except in cases of self-defense under Article 51 or when authorized by the United Nations Security Council. If the incident occurred in international waters and outside an active armed conflict zone, international law experts would question the legal justification for such an attack.

Furthermore, the incident raises issues regarding the law of naval warfare and the protection of neutral maritime zones. If the vessel was operating outside a declared theatre of hostilities, the attack could potentially be scrutinized under the broader framework of international humanitarian law governing armed conflict at sea.

For countries such as India, whose maritime environment may be indirectly affected, such developments raise concerns about the erosion of legal norms governing naval conduct in international waters.

Neutral States and the Protection of Maritime Commerce

India occupies a unique position in the current crisis. As a neutral state not directly involved in hostilities, India enjoys rights under international law to ensure the safe passage of its commercial vessels through international waters.

The principle of neutrality requires belligerent states to refrain from targeting the commercial shipping of neutral nations unless there is clear evidence that such vessels are directly contributing to the war effort of an adversary. Interference with neutral shipping without lawful justification could be regarded as a violation of established maritime law.

Indian policymakers and legal experts therefore closely monitor any developments that could threaten the safety of Indian tankers transporting energy supplies through the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea.

Energy Security and Legal Diplomacy

India’s heavy dependence on imported energy makes the stability of international maritime routes a matter of national economic security. Consequently, India’s diplomatic engagement in the region is not merely political but also legal in nature.

Indian diplomats and legal advisors consistently emphasize the importance of maintaining freedom of navigation and adherence to established international maritime norms. Such positions are aligned with India’s broader commitment to a rules-based international order in maritime governance.

At the same time, India seeks to maintain balanced relations with all major actors in the region, including the United States, Iran, and Gulf states. This balanced approach reflects the legal and diplomatic prudence required of a state that must protect its national interests without escalating tensions.

The Role of Multilateral Platforms

The crisis also highlights the limitations of existing multilateral mechanisms in addressing emerging maritime conflicts. Institutions such as the United Nations Security Council and regional diplomatic forums remain essential for conflict resolution, yet geopolitical divisions often impede collective responses.

India’s engagement with platforms such as BRICS and other international forums reflects its broader commitment to encouraging dialogue, de-escalation, and respect for international law. As a major emerging power, India’s diplomatic voice carries growing significance in shaping norms related to maritime security and global governance.

Conclusion

The ongoing West Asian crisis represents not only a geopolitical confrontation but also a significant test for the international legal order governing maritime conduct and the use of force. Issues surrounding freedom of navigation, the legality of naval engagements, and the rights of neutral states have become central to the evolving conflict.

From an Indian perspective, the crisis underscores the importance of safeguarding maritime trade routes, protecting energy security, and upholding the principles of international law that ensure stability in global commons. For legal scholars and practitioners alike, the events unfolding in the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean serve as a reminder that adherence to international law remains essential for preventing regional conflicts from escalating into broader global instability.