• CEA Environmental Impact Assessor recommends coral/mangrove restoration, fish population restoration via implantation of artificial reefs/structures, establishing mutually acceptable ‘no catch zone’ along the IMBL or maritime protected area, permitting licensed Indian fishermen with a levy, declaring cap values, only banning fishing during breeding, educating/sensitising fishermen on cross border issues through awareness creation

In the context of the conflict over the overexploitation of fisheries resources beyond the Indo-Sri Lankan coastal borders, restorative solutions such as coral and mangrove restoration, the restoration of the fish population via the implantation of artificial reefs or similar structures, establishing a bilateral and mutually acceptable “no catch zone” along the International Maritime Boundary Line (IMBL) or maritime protected area (MPA), the latter though uncertain in terms of political feasibility, can be recommended. 

Other green solutions to the issue include permitting licensed Indian fishermen in Sri Lankan waters with a levy, declaring cap values, only banning fishing during breeding seasons, and educating or sensitising fishermen on cross border issues by creating awareness.

These recommendations were proposed by S. Sivaramanan (attached to the Central Environmental Authority [CEA]'s Environmental Management and Assessment Division's Environmental Impact Assessment Unit) in an article on “Potential solutions to the environmental conflict on the exploitation of fish stocks in the Palk Strait among the fishermen of India and Sri Lanka” which was published in the Sri Lanka Journal of Aquatic Sciences (28)1, this month. 

According to the United Nations (UN) Environment Programme, as mentioned in D. Schwartz and A. Singh's “Environmental conditions, resources, and conflicts: An introductory overview and data collection”, environmental conflicts occur for three main purposes, namely, the overuse of renewable resources, pollution or an unfavourable change in the environment, and the impoverishment of the space for living. Direct environmental conflicts occur when there is international competition for renewable resources such as water, crude oil, crop land, fish, and forests. Nations may even tend to justify it by military action in the name of economic preservation and national security, and this can even occur between States. Indirect environmental conflicts occur where factors such as soil erosion, agricultural contamination, and water pollution create or elevate other social issues such as poverty, famine, ethnic cleavages, mass migration, and the uneven distribution of resources, desertification, deforestation, and overfishing.

Indian and Sri Lankan fisheries in the Palk Strait region have a long history, even before the British colonial period, where fishermen of both the countries had highly intimate relationships. This is still visible, as some fishing families have relations in other nations and often exchange their resources among families. However, increased population and competition for coastal resources, the invasion of trawlers and machinery fishing, the overexploitation and destruction of non-targeted environmental resources, the use of prohibited fishing methods such as bottom trawling, the previous internal war in Sri Lanka, the smuggling of narcotics and jewels across borders, and illegal trade have all led to both countries tightening their maritime legislation and rules. Even though these were not sufficient to control the situation, they have worsened the conflicts among the fishing communities of both the nations and the situation has now emerged as a direct environmental conflict. In addition, the overexploitation of natural resources is a keystone environmental problem. 

V. Suryanarayan's “The India-Sri Lanka fisheries dispute: Creating a win-win in the Palk Bay” observes that the Governments of both the countries have affirmed their commitment to finding a permanent solution to the dispute. He pointed out three factors such as “the issue of the territorial rights of Kachchatheevu, the frequent poaching by Indian fishermen in Sri Lankan waters, and the damaging economic and environmental impacts of trawling”, and he therefore, proposed regaining the island of Kachchatheevu on lease in perpetuity, and permitting licensed Indian fishermen to fish within a designated area of the Sri Lankan waters and vice versa. However, both of these solutions ignore the environmental problem of the overexploitation of the marine resources in the Sri Lankan territorial waters; thus, bottom trawling in the Palk Strait region may further fuel environmental deterioration and the loss of biodiversity.

J. Scholtens's “The elusive quest for access and collective action: Northern Sri Lankan fishers’ thwarted struggles against a foreign trawler fleet” proposed solutions based on a nation's right to use its power to protect its resources, and institutional resource stewardship based on marginalising access mechanisms. These solutions prioritise resource sharing over resource sustainability and protection. 

In contrast, J. Stephen, A. Menon. J. Scholtens and M. Bavinck's “Transboundary dialogues and the 'politics of scale' in Palk Bay fisheries: Brothers at sea?” suggested solving the issue more through dialogue and expounded on the 2004 and 2010 agreements (the latter restricted Indian fishermen from conducting unlawful fishing operations in Sri Lankan waters, such as purse seining and pair trawling, and prevented the presence of Indian fishing vessels too close to Sri Lankan shores; however, the implementation failed due to a lack of monitoring mechanisms to observe the Indian fishing activities in Sri Lankan waters, and the increased export demand for shrimp caught in the region which pushed Indian fishermen to further violate the agreement) between the fishing communities of both the nations with the mediation of a non-Governmental organisation. 

According to O. Amarasinghe's “Fisheries conflicts in the Palk Bay: Is there a way out? From a Sri Lankan viewpoint”, conflict resolution talks were held at three levels, namely, at the level of fishermen, between the fishermen and their respective Governments, and at the Governmental level with Ministerial talks between India and Sri Lanka. He further stated that a bilateral meeting of both Sri Lankan and Indian Government representatives held in April, 2005, in India, led to the establishment of a bilateral joint working group. As mentioned in J. Scholtens's “Limits to the governability of transboundary fisheries: Implications for small scale fishers in Northern Sri Lanka and beyond”, as a result, the meetings in 2008, 2011, and 2012 prevented Indian fishing vessels from entering the identified sensitive areas.

R. Stirrat's “The Palk Bay fishing dispute revisited” put forward views on how the dispute was approached in terms of legal pluralism, and these resonate with those of the political economy, where resource utilisation and the drivers should be well understood. 

Other proposed long-term solutions to the tragedy include the retrieval of Kachchatheevu and the restoration of the traditional rights of Tamil Nadu fishermen in Kachchatheevu, both of which seem biased toward the Indian counterpart, and the joint governance and management of the Palk Bay.

K. Deepananda, N. Abeykoon and K. Amaralal's “Indo-Sri Lanka fishing conflict in the Palk Bay and its implications for fisheries” claims that the influential factors in the conflict were the establishment of the IMBL, the introduction of trawlers by Indian fisheries in the 1960s with the expansion of shrimp exports, the implementation of the fishing ban by the Government of Sri Lanka during the internal war (1983-2009), the resumption of distant water fisheries by Sri Lanka after the end of the internal war, and the damage to artisanal fishers' fishing craft and gear, and proposed therefore that both Governments should seek an amicable, long-lasting, sustainable solution. 

It has also been suggested that vital solutions can be found through continuous dialogue between the fishermen of both the nations such as the 2004 and 2010 fisher-to-fisher dialogues.

B. Majumder and A. Malhotra's “The fishing wars maritime border conflict between India and Sri Lanka” questioned as to why both India and Sri Lanka do not seek international litigation for the conflict under the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas and highlighted that for the sake of environmental benefits, international attention should be brought to the issue by abiding by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. 

M. Mayilvaganan's “Fishing conflicts in the Palk Bay: Are the Indian fishermen ‘carefully careless'?” suggested that both the Governments should take measures to educate and sensitise the fishermen on transboundary crossings, conduct regular meetings between both the parties, ban trawling, purse seines, and minnow seines, decongest Rameswaram fishing trawlers, and break the nexus between politicians, businessmen, and fishermen. These suggestions broadly consider most of the socio-economic and political factors, but they hardly consider the environmental factors and the restoration of the natural resources in the Palk region.

In 1974, Kachchatheevu, which is an island found at the coastal borders of both the countries, was given to Sri Lanka by India as a symbol of friendship. In addition, India has a strong influence in Sri Lanka's politics. However, the Sri Lankan internal war had a significant effect on the fishing communities of both the nations at the Palk Strait. Several shooting incidents against fishermen had also been reported while the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) was smuggling arms during the clashes between the Sri Lankan security forces and the LTTE. In addition, the illegal taxation of the fishermen by the LTTE, the restricted time limits given by the Government to fish, the passing system and security checks, and displacements due to the war all affected the livelihood of the fishing community in Sri Lanka. However, after the end of the war, the invasion of Indian fishing vessels increased in the Sri Lankan waters. It has been noticed that a flotilla of boats trespasses the IMBL on alternate nights and usually over-exploits the Sri Lankan coastal resources non-selectively (both non-targeted species and juvenile forms of fish).

It has been expressed that Indian fishermen are using illegal methods of fishing, which are banned in Sri Lanka as well as internationally (e.g. bottom trawling), because the Palk Strait is shallow and contains highly valuable coral reef structures, thus making deep sea trawlers not appropriate for use. As noted in C. Gupta's "Blurred borders: Coastal fish flock and environmental conflicts between India and Sri Lanka", under the West Bengal Marine Fishing Regulation Act of India (1993), trawlers are only permitted beyond three nautical miles from the shores, but they often violate the Act due to the high catch in the region. Moreover, unlike Sri Lankan vessels, such Indian trawlers are provided with Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking systems, and they clearly know their location in the sea, and as to whether they are beyond the border or not.

Trawler fishing is an unselective way of fishing and it destroys the coral reefs, which are vital for the biodiversity of the region, and it also catches juvenile forms of fish and non-targeted organisms such as endangered sea turtles. Sri Lankan fishermen have multi-day boats, and they are not as destructive as trawler fisheries. 

These massive invasions and the unselective overexploitation of the fishing resources result in resource depletion or even species extinction in the long run. Sri Lanka has an unavoidable responsibility to protect her natural fisheries resources and the livelihood of Northern fishermen. Further, it is a violation of the fundamental rights of the Sri Lankan fishermen, and this may in turn cause a loss of public trust and have a great impact on the governance of natural resources in the territorial sea. In this case, even shooting incidents by Naval security forces were complained about on several occasions. The South Indian political network has condemned the Sri Lankan political leadership for recently mentioning that Indian fishermen have no rights to the Sri Lankan territorial waters in the North. However, this does not affect the visiting of Indian fishing families during the festival at the St. Antony's Shrine in Kachchatheevu and drying their fishing nets there (as per Article 5 of the 1974 Kachchatheevu agreement and the 1976 agreement). Sri Lankan fishermen also illegally invade Indian coastal waters and are found guilty under the Maritime Zones of India Act (1981).