India’s Seafarers Power Trade. Why Are They Unprotected?

Introduction

India has spent the last decade speaking confidently about becoming a major maritime power. Ports are being modernised, coastal infrastructure is expanding, shipping corridors are gaining diplomatic importance, and the Indo Pacific has become central to India’s foreign policy vocabulary.

Yet one of India’s strongest maritime assets remains largely absent from this strategic conversation.

That asset is its workforce.

India is now the world’s second largest supplier of seafarers. More than 12 percent of the global maritime workforce comes from India. Indian officers, engineers, technicians, and crew members work on commercial vessels that transport energy, food, manufactured goods, and raw materials across the world.

Their labour supports global trade, but their strategic value has not been fully recognised by Indian foreign policy.

India has built diplomatic frameworks for land based migrant workers, especially in Gulf countries. It has negotiated labour mobility partnerships, strengthened consular assistance, and created digital systems to regulate overseas recruitment.

Indian seafarers, however, often remain outside these protections.

They work across jurisdictions, sail on foreign flagged vessels, sign contracts with overseas companies, and pass through ports controlled by different legal systems. When wages are withheld, accidents occur, ships are abandoned, or conflicts threaten commercial routes, responsibility becomes fragmented.

India therefore faces a contradiction. It supplies one of the largest maritime workforces in the world but has not converted this position into diplomatic influence or reliable protection for its citizens.

India’s Growing Maritime Workforce

India’s seafaring workforce has expanded rapidly over the past decade. The country has developed a large network of maritime training institutions and produces skilled officers, engineers, ratings, and technical personnel for the global shipping industry.

Indian seafarers are valued for their technical competence, English language skills, professional training, and ability to work in multinational crews.

Their importance extends far beyond Indian owned ships.

A large share of Indian seafarers work aboard vessels that are owned, managed, registered, or insured outside India. A ship may be owned by a company in one country, registered under the flag of another, managed from a third, and staffed by workers from several others.

This makes maritime employment fundamentally different from ordinary overseas migration.

A construction worker in another country usually works within the territorial jurisdiction of that country. A seafarer may cross several jurisdictions within a single employment contract while spending most of the contract outside the territory of any state.

The maritime labour market is global, but systems of welfare, compensation, and diplomatic protection remain largely national.

A Strategic Asset Without a Foreign Policy Strategy

India’s maritime workforce should be treated as an instrument of economic and diplomatic influence.

Countries in the Gulf, Southeast Asia, and Europe depend heavily on foreign maritime labour. Global shipping companies need a continuous supply of trained officers and crew members to operate commercial fleets.

India’s growing share of this workforce gives it potential bargaining power.

This leverage could be used during negotiations on trade agreements, labour mobility partnerships, shipping cooperation, port access, social security, and mutual recognition of professional qualifications.

Yet maritime labour rarely occupies a prominent place in such negotiations.

India has negotiated mobility frameworks for professionals, students, caregivers, and other categories of workers. Seafarers are usually treated as a specialised regulatory subject rather than as a strategic labour constituency.

This represents a missed opportunity.

A country that supplies a significant share of the workers operating global trade routes should seek stronger protections and economic benefits in return.

India could negotiate dedicated maritime labour chapters in bilateral agreements. These chapters could address wages, insurance, medical treatment, social security, repatriation, dispute resolution, and recognition of certificates.

Without such provisions, India exports skilled labour while leaving many of the associated risks to individual workers and their families.

The Jurisdiction Problem at Sea

The greatest weakness in maritime labour protection is the uncertainty over responsibility.

Under international maritime law, the flag state has primary responsibility for regulating working conditions aboard a ship. The flag state is the country in which the vessel is registered.

In principle, this creates a clear legal authority. In practice, the arrangement can become complicated.

Many ships operate under flags of convenience. Companies may register vessels in countries offering lower taxes, limited regulation, or weaker enforcement. The shipowner, operator, insurer, recruitment agency, and crew may all be connected to different countries.

When an Indian seafarer is injured, abandoned, detained, or denied wages, several questions arise.

Should the flag state take responsibility?

Should the country where the shipping company is based intervene?

Should the port state where the ship is anchored act?

Should the recruitment agency compensate the worker?

Should the Indian government provide diplomatic assistance?

Each institution may have a limited role, but no single institution may assume full responsibility.

The result is a protection gap.

For a seafarer and their family, the existence of multiple legal jurisdictions does not produce more protection. It can produce delay, confusion, and denial of accountability.

The Maritime Labour Convention and Its Limits

The Maritime Labour Convention of 2006 is the principal international framework protecting seafarers.

It establishes minimum standards for employment agreements, wages, working hours, accommodation, food, medical care, health protection, welfare, and repatriation. It is often described as a global bill of rights for seafarers.

India ratified the convention and introduced domestic rules to implement its provisions.

The convention is important because it recognises that seafarers require international protection. National labour laws alone cannot regulate an industry in which workers and vessels constantly cross borders.

However, the existence of standards does not guarantee their enforcement.

Protection still depends on the capacity and willingness of flag states, port states, shipowners, insurers, recruitment agencies, and national authorities.

Weak enforcement becomes especially visible when companies fail, vessels are abandoned, or ships operate under flags associated with limited regulatory oversight.

A worker may possess rights under international law but still struggle to secure unpaid wages, medical compensation, or repatriation.

India must therefore move beyond formal compliance with the convention. It needs a diplomatic and administrative strategy that helps Indian seafarers exercise these rights in practice.

The Social Security Portability Gap

Seafarers spend large parts of their careers working outside India, often under a succession of international contracts.

Their employment may generate income abroad, but access to long term social security remains uncertain.

A worker may contribute to an insurance or pension system linked to one country or employer during a contract. After moving to another vessel, company, or jurisdiction, those benefits may not continue.

This creates a portability problem.

Social security portability allows workers to retain or transfer benefits when they change employers or move between countries. It is particularly important for migrant workers whose careers span several jurisdictions.

India has pursued social security agreements with certain countries for land based employees. These agreements can prevent workers from paying contributions in two countries and allow eligible benefits to be transferred.

Maritime workers need similar arrangements.

India should negotiate agreements that recognise the mobile nature of seafaring employment. These arrangements could cover occupational injury, disability, pension contributions, medical treatment, death compensation, and support for dependants.

Without portability, workers may spend decades supporting global commerce without building reliable long term protection for themselves.

Why the Existing Emigration System Is Not Enough

India’s e Migrate system was created to make overseas employment safer and more transparent. It regulates recruitment, records employment contracts, and helps protect workers travelling to countries where migration risks are significant.

A separate digital system also records the engagement of Indian seafarers through approved shipowners and recruitment agencies.

However, administrative recording is not the same as comprehensive protection.

The maritime employment system remains divided across different authorities, databases, recruitment channels, and regulatory frameworks.

Seafarers may interact with the Directorate General of Shipping, recruitment and placement agencies, shipping companies, port authorities, foreign missions, insurers, and welfare organisations.

When a crisis occurs, workers and families may not know which institution should be approached first.

India needs an integrated maritime migration framework that connects employment records with consular protection, emergency response, insurance status, contract details, vessel information, and grievance mechanisms.

Such a system should allow authorities to quickly identify where an Indian seafarer is employed, which company controls the vessel, which flag it carries, and what insurance protection applies.

Digital registration should become the foundation of protection rather than a procedural formality.

Unequal Diplomatic Protection

India has developed substantial diplomatic experience in protecting migrant workers abroad.

Indian embassies in Gulf countries often assist workers facing wage disputes, detention, recruitment fraud, or difficult living conditions. Labour wings, community welfare funds, and evacuation systems have been created to respond to emergencies.

Seafarers do not always receive an equivalent institutional framework.

Their workplace may be a vessel moving between ports rather than a fixed location within a country. The embassy responsible for assisting them may change depending on where the ship is located.

A vessel in distress may be outside territorial waters. An injured worker may be taken to a port in a country where neither the employer nor the recruitment agency is based.

These conditions require specialised maritime diplomacy.

Indian missions in major port countries should have trained maritime labour officers or designated officials capable of handling cases involving abandonment, detention, injury, death, unpaid wages, and repatriation.

India should also establish standard operating procedures connecting embassies with maritime authorities at home.

The goal should be simple. An Indian citizen should not receive weaker diplomatic protection merely because the workplace happens to be at sea.

Conflict Zones Reveal the Vulnerability

Commercial shipping has become increasingly exposed to geopolitical conflict.

Attacks in the Red Sea, tensions in West Asia, piracy, sanctions, territorial disputes, and military operations can place civilian crews in immediate danger.

Indian seafarers are often present on vessels operating through these sensitive routes.

When a ship is attacked, the nationality of the crew may matter more to India than the nationality of the vessel. Yet legal and operational responsibility may remain with a foreign flag state or overseas company.

This is where maritime labour becomes a foreign policy issue.

India cannot view shipping conflicts only through the lenses of trade flows, energy imports, and naval security. It must also consider the safety of Indian workers aboard commercial vessels.

Before workers are deployed to conflict prone routes, they should receive clear risk information and the right to refuse unsafe assignments without unfair penalties.

Employers should be required to provide adequate insurance, communication facilities, emergency plans, and additional compensation for high risk voyages.

Indian missions and maritime authorities must also maintain crisis response mechanisms for evacuation and repatriation.

Turning Maritime Manpower Into Diplomatic Leverage

India should use its position as a major supplier of seafarers more strategically.

The first step is to include maritime labour protection in bilateral negotiations with major shipping and employment destinations.

India can seek binding commitments on social security, accident compensation, medical care, wage protection, and repatriation.

The second step is to negotiate mutual recognition of maritime qualifications. Indian certificates and training standards should receive wider automatic recognition, reducing administrative barriers for workers.

The third step is to build partnerships with major port states. These partnerships can create rapid response mechanisms for Indian seafarers facing emergencies.

The fourth step is to link labour supply with market access. Countries and companies benefiting from Indian maritime skills should meet minimum standards of worker protection.

The fifth step is to establish agreements with insurers and protection associations so that compensation claims can be processed more quickly.

India should not treat its seafarers merely as individuals seeking employment abroad. Collectively, they form a strategic workforce that supports the functioning of international commerce.

The Governance Reforms India Needs

India requires a clear national maritime workforce policy that brings together training, employment, welfare, diplomacy, and economic strategy.

A unified maritime worker database should include employment contracts, vessel details, flag registration, employer information, insurance coverage, emergency contacts, and deployment routes.

A dedicated national maritime welfare authority could coordinate grievance handling, legal assistance, compensation, repatriation, and family support.

Recruitment agencies should face strict accountability for placing workers on vessels with poor safety or payment records.

India should also maintain a regularly updated risk list of ships, companies, and recruitment channels associated with abandonment, unpaid wages, or unsafe conditions.

Families of seafarers need a single emergency contact system rather than being redirected between departments.

Training institutions should include legal literacy, contract awareness, insurance education, and conflict zone preparedness in their curriculum.

Most importantly, the Ministry of External Affairs and the maritime administration must work as part of the same protection system.

Maritime workforce policy cannot remain confined to shipping regulation. It must become part of labour diplomacy and foreign policy.

Looking Seaward Must Include People

India’s maritime vision often focuses on ports, ships, logistics corridors, naval power, coastal security, and the blue economy.

These are important pillars of maritime strength, but they remain incomplete without attention to the people who operate ships and sustain trade.

A country does not become a maritime power only by building infrastructure or expanding naval capacity.

It also becomes a maritime power by protecting its citizens at sea, shaping international labour standards, negotiating favourable agreements, and using its workforce as a source of influence.

Indian seafarers connect the country to ports, shipping companies, and commercial networks across the world. They are not peripheral to foreign policy. They are participants in it.

Conclusion

India’s rise as the world’s second largest supplier of seafarers is both an achievement and a test.

The country has successfully created a workforce trusted by the global shipping industry. It has not yet created an equally strong system for protecting that workforce or using its importance diplomatically.

Indian seafarers continue to face fragmented jurisdiction, uncertain social security, inconsistent consular support, and serious risks on foreign flagged vessels.

The Maritime Labour Convention provides a global foundation, but international standards must be backed by national capacity and bilateral negotiation.

India now has an opportunity to transform maritime manpower into a strategic foreign policy asset.

This requires dedicated labour agreements, portable social security, specialised consular protection, stronger recruitment oversight, and an integrated maritime migration system.

Foreign policy must certainly look seaward. But looking seaward should not mean watching only shipping lanes, ports, and naval movements.

It must also mean recognising the Indian workers who keep global trade moving and ensuring that the country’s maritime ambition does not leave its own citizens behind.