Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) are the key maritime passageways that facilitate heavy shipping traffic volumes and host the transportation of key maritime trades such as crude oil. They are characterized by the intensity of their use and narrow passages or ‘chokepoints’ that require ships to navigate cautiously when passing through, for fear of causing accidents that may cause pollution or disrupt the flow of shipping traffic. Any incident in these chokepoints can result in disruption to shipping traffic that can have adverse repercussions on the economic interests of the littoral states of SLOCs and on international trade. Given their vulnerability and importance, it is imperative that SLOCs are managed efficiently to ensure safety of passage for ships and to safeguard the interests of the littoral states and users of the SLOCs. In doing so, a multilateral approach that promotes cooperation, collaboration and capacity building offers the best construct for the optimal management of SLOCs, with the littoral states at the center of such initiatives. This approach, argues the paper, provides the best model for the upkeep of SLOCs, given the global nature of shipping and the multiple, and sometimes conflicting, interests in the sealanes. The paper emphasizes the need for users of SLOCs to shed the ‘free rider’ mentality and take up collective responsibility to maintain and manage the SLOCs based on the principles of international law and in full respect for the rights of the littoral states.

Sea Lines of Communication (SLOCs) are the key maritime passageways that facilitate heavy shipping traffic volumes and host the transportation of key maritime trades such as crude oil. They feature narrow passages or ‘chokepoints’ that require ship captains to exercise extra caution when passing through, for fear of causing accidents that may spill the cargos carried by their ships and disrupt the flow of shipping traffic.

By virtue of this definition, SLOCs hold tremendous strategic importance and geopolitical value to their users. In times of conflict, it is not unusual to find SLOCs blocked by naval powers seeking to deny their enemies of critical seaborne supplies to cripple the latter. When the great American maritime historian and scholar, Alfred Thayer Mahan, said, “whomsoever controls the sea, controls the land”, he well might have had SLOCs in mind.

As the world trade rises in volumes, shipping traffic is also expected to grow correspondingly. Ships enable the transportation of nearly 90% of the world’s trade by volume and facilitate a host of other activities such as offshore oil and gas exploration and production, fishery and cruise tourism.

With this, the world’s SLOCs such as Strait of Malacca (the world’s busiest shipping lane), Strait of Hormuz (the most strategic passage for seaborne global crude oil transportation) and the South China Sea (a maritime area subject to claims, counterclaims and disputes, and strategic power play among naval powers) are expected to host a growing number of ships in the foreseeable future. International spotlight will brightly be on the safety of navigation, security and environmental state of these passageways as shipping traffic along them intensifies.

In addition to the growing use by merchant vessels, SLOCs are expected to host more naval vessels in the foreseeable future. As nations exert their claims and propagate their strategic interests in key maritime areas, the role of their navies as an instrument of power to protect these claims and interests will become more pronounced in SLOCs. China, for example, has not been discreet in stating what it describes as its ‘undisputable sovereign rights’ in the South China Sea which it also calls a ‘core interest’, while the United States has described the sea as an area of ‘national interest’ and parts thereof as a ‘pivot’. This strong language suggests that the two naval powers would not hesitate to use naval force to safeguard their interests in the South China Sea and exert their supremacy in this sealane which is of tremendous strategic importance.

International Relations Journal, Ethnic Conflict in Nepal, Ethnic Communities, Ethnic Divisions, Madhesi Community, Systematic Discriminatory Treatment, Democratic System, Decision-Making Process, Policy Planning Process, Socioeconomic Development, Economic Exclusion, Indigenous Nationalities Movement.