Attack in the Indian Ocean: Why India’s Silence Is So Troubling
India now faces a difficult strategic choice. If it wishes to lead the Indian Ocean, it must decide whether silence can remain part of that leadership.
Attack in the Indian Ocean: Why India Cannot Stay Silent
The expanding conflict between the United States and Iran has now reached the Indian Ocean, a maritime space that India has long described as central to its strategic vision. Yet as the crisis unfolded, India appeared largely a silent spectator.
In Indian culture, the phrase Atithi Devo Bhava — “the guest is equivalent to God” — reflects a deeply held belief in extending respect and protection to those who visit. It was India that invited the Iranian frigate IRIS Dena to participate in two naval events hosted at Visakhapatnam, a major naval hub on India’s eastern coast. Iran gracefully accepted the invitation and its ship sailed to the Indian Ocean to join exercises hosted by the Indian Navy’s Eastern Naval Command. Yet when the same vessel was later attacked by a U.S. submarine while returning home, India’s public response remained minimal. For a country that often describes itself as a guardian of stability in the Indian Ocean, the silence has been striking.
Support Independent Journalism. Public interest stories that affect ordinary citizens — especially those without power or voice — requires time, resources, and independence. Your support — even a modest contribution — allows us to uncover stories that would otherwise remain hidden. Support The Probe by contributing to projects that resonate with you (Click Here), or Become a Member of The Probe to stand with us (Click Here). |
Attack in the Indian Ocean and the Questions It Raises
The events that led to the attack began with two high-profile maritime gatherings hosted by the Indian Navy. The Iranian frigate had travelled to India to participate in Exercise MILAN 2026, a large multinational naval exercise involving dozens of countries, and the International Fleet Review 2026, a ceremonial gathering of warships conducted on behalf of the President of India. Both events were held in Visakhapatnam and brought naval forces from across the world into the Indian Ocean. After completing these engagements, the IRIS Dena began its return journey to Iran.
Also Read: The Murder of Ali Khamenei and the Questions the World Refuses to Ask
On 4 March 2026, while sailing in the Indian Ocean roughly 40 nautical miles south of Galle, Sri Lanka, the Iranian warship was struck by a torpedo fired from a U.S. Navy submarine.
The attack was devastating. Around 180 crew members were believed to be on board. Sri Lankan rescuers recovered 87 bodies and about 32 sailors were rescued, while more than 60 remain missing.
India’s official response focused on the humanitarian dimension. The Indian Navy said it received a distress signal from the vessel and joined Sri Lanka in search-and-rescue operations.
Yet India stopped short of commenting on the attack itself. There was no public condemnation, no expression of regret over the deaths of sailors who were India’s guests, and no diplomatic initiative to address the broader crisis unfolding in the Indian Ocean.
Why India cannot rely on the “not our waters” argument
Indian officials have suggested that the attack did not take place in India’s territorial waters and therefore did not fall directly under India’s responsibility. Legally, the strike occurred in international waters near Sri Lanka. But the broader strategic context makes the issue more complicated.
India has long presented itself as a central security actor in the Indian Ocean. Under the maritime doctrine known as SAGAR — Security and Growth for All in the Region — promoted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India describes itself as a “net security provider” and a first responder in regional crises. When a major naval incident occurs in the same Indian Ocean where India claims leadership, simply pointing to legal jurisdiction and deflecting accountability is not enough.
India also faces a second argument it cannot easily dismiss. The ship that was attacked had been invited to India only days earlier. The IRIS Dena participated in naval events organised by the Indian Navy itself. From a diplomatic perspective, that fact creates at least a moral responsibility toward a visiting vessel that had just taken part in exercises hosted by India in the Indian Ocean.
Also Read: Iran's Next Leader After Khamenei: How He Is Chosen
A third factor is geography. The attack occurred close to Sri Lanka, a country that India regularly describes as part of its immediate maritime neighbourhood. The waters south of Sri Lanka are among the busiest shipping routes in the Indian Ocean and fall squarely within the regional security environment monitored by the Indian Navy.
Finally, silence carries its own consequences. India frequently presents itself as a stabilising force in the Indian Ocean. If a warship is sunk in those waters and India does not speak politically about the incident, it weakens the credibility of those claims and leaves the strategic narrative of the Indian Ocean to be shaped by other powers.
Iran Openly Says India’s Guest Was attacked
Iran itself has framed the incident in terms that place India at the centre of the story.
Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi wrote on X:
“The U.S. has perpetrated an atrocity at sea, 2,000 miles away from Iran's shores.
Frigate Dena, a guest of India's Navy carrying almost 130 sailors, was struck in international waters without warning.
Mark my words: The U.S. will come to bitterly regret precedent it has set.”
Notably, Araghchi did not emphasise Sri Lanka’s proximity or the precise location of the attack in the Indian Ocean. Instead, he highlighted the fact that the vessel had been a guest of the Indian Navy.
For two weeks before the incident, Iranian sailors had taken part in naval events hosted by India. Officers from both navies interacted, trained together and exchanged ceremonial gestures that are common during international fleet gatherings. Many of those sailors are now dead or missing. Yet the officials who welcomed them in the Indian Ocean have remained publicly cautious even in expressing condolences.
In that sense, the sinking of the vessel has also exposed the limits of India’s influence in the Indian Ocean — not through military weakness, but through diplomatic hesitation.
India’s Handling of the Distress Call Has Also Come Under Scrutiny
Just weeks before the tragedy, the Indian Navy publicly highlighted its growing cooperation with Iran. In a social-media post on 19 February, the Navy said its chief Admiral Dinesh K Tripathi had interacted with Admiral Shahram Irani, the commander of the Iranian Navy. The discussion focused on expanding operational cooperation and maritime engagement in the Indian Ocean.
The Indian Navy noted in that message:
“The presence of IRIS Dena underscored Iran’s active engagement at IFR 2026.”
The language reflected the broader spirit of naval diplomacy — cooperation, maritime security and partnership across the Indian Ocean. Yet the contrast between those words and the events that followed has been difficult to ignore. When tragedy struck the very ship whose presence had been publicly welcomed, India’s response remained limited and cautious.
According to official statements, India responded after receiving information about the distress signal from the Iranian vessel. The alert was reportedly received by rescue authorities early on 4 March, after which India deployed maritime patrol aircraft and later dispatched a naval vessel to assist search operations.
The Indian Navy has said it joined the rescue effort coordinated by Sri Lanka.
However, independent reports suggest that several hours passed between the distress call and the arrival of assistance at the scene. Sri Lanka’s navy appears to have been the first responder in the rescue effort. The key question is whether faster assistance could have been provided, particularly given the proximity of major naval deployments in the Indian Ocean.
India Avoided Political Leadership in the Crisis
Beyond operational questions, the larger issue concerns political leadership. In a crisis involving the sinking of a warship in the Indian Ocean, regional leadership could have taken several forms. A country in India’s position might issue a clear public statement, call for restraint, or encourage diplomatic dialogue between the parties involved.
Also Read: US Unlikely to Back Off on Iran After Operation Against Maduro
Political leadership could also involve coordinating regional responses with countries such as Sri Lanka, or raising the matter in international forums such as the United Nations.
India confined its response largely to search-and-rescue operations, sidestepping the larger political implications of the incident. In doing so, it stopped short of issuing a diplomatic response to one of the most serious naval events the Indian Ocean has seen in decades.
How Deadly the Attack in the Indian Ocean Was
The Iranian frigate was struck by a Mark-48 torpedo fired from a U.S. fast-attack submarine while sailing through the Indian Ocean after completing naval engagements in India. Defence officials in the US have released only a partial timeline, but the sequence that has emerged suggests that the vessel was transiting the region when the torpedo was launched in the early hours of 4 March. At approximately 5:08 a.m., the ship transmitted a distress signal reporting a powerful explosion. Soon after, the vessel appears to have suffered catastrophic structural damage and sank before nearby rescue units could reach the scene.
The Pentagon later released edited footage of the strike, showing a large underwater explosion near the stern of the ship. The incident has already drawn attention for its historical significance. It is believed to be the first time since the Second World War that a U.S. submarine has sunk an enemy warship using a torpedo in combat, marking a rare and deadly episode of modern naval warfare in the Indian Ocean.
The Mark-48 torpedo, often written as Mk-48, is the primary heavy torpedo used by the U.S. Navy. It is designed specifically to destroy large ships and submarines.
Unlike missiles that strike from above, a torpedo travels underwater at high speed after being launched from a submarine. Modern torpedoes such as the Mk-48 are designed to detonate beneath a ship rather than against its side.
When the explosion occurs under the hull, it creates a massive bubble of gas that lifts the vessel upward. As the bubble collapses, the structure of the ship can snap or break in the middle. This process — known in naval warfare as a keel-breaking explosion — is among the most destructive methods of sinking a large vessel.
The Strategic Choice Now Facing India
Warships that participate in multinational naval exercises are typically present as symbols of cooperation rather than active combat forces. Their presence in the Indian Ocean is meant to reflect dialogue and partnership among navies.
The sinking of the IRIS Dena has therefore produced an uncomfortable coincidence. A warship that had just taken part in an Indian-hosted naval event was destroyed days later in the same Indian Ocean. India’s response remained silent and cautious. Soon afterwards, the United States issued a 30-day waiver allowing Indian refiners to purchase and offload Russian oil.
It would be utterly irresponsible to claim, without evidence, that the sinking of the Iranian ship, India’s silence, and the U.S. issuing a waiver for India to purchase Russian oil are all connected. But the familiar logic of diplomacy — the mixture of incentives and pressure often described as a carrot-and-stick approach — which the U.S. has lately been imposing on India cannot be ignored.
India now faces a difficult strategic choice. If it wishes to lead the Indian Ocean, it must decide whether silence can remain part of that leadership.
Support Independent Journalism. Public interest stories that affect ordinary citizens — especially those without power or voice — requires time, resources, and independence. Your support — even a modest contribution — allows us to uncover stories that would otherwise remain hidden. Support The Probe by contributing to projects that resonate with you (Click Here), or Become a Member of The Probe to stand with us (Click Here). |
