Zuqar Island: MEA Says 14 Indian Nationals Are Safe Near Hodeidah

What the Indian update established

The New Indian Express reported Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal's account at the 23 October briefing. He understood that the group was in Hodeidah. India was working through parties and community contacts to reach them, address their welfare and consider their possible return. That is more specific than the earlier statement that precise information was unavailable. It does not, however, establish that they had already returned to India. Nor does the reported safety update identify the vessel's attacker or independently resolve how the incident occurred.

The accounts describe the vessel variously as a boat, yacht or dhow, but do not establish its name, registration or cargo. The count of Indian nationals identifies the people whose welfare India was addressing, not the work each person was doing. Their reported safety answers an urgent human question. Determining what happened to the vessel and who was responsible requires different evidence, including a consistent vessel identification and accounts from those aboard. Contact with the group would also provide more direct information about their needs and what they experienced.

Where Zuqar sits in the southern Red Sea

The island is also recorded as Zukur or Zugar. The Smithsonian's Global Volcanism Program locates it at approximately 14.02° north and 42.75° east. It is the northernmost large island in the Zuqar–Hanish group, between mainland Yemen to the east and the Eritrean coast to the west. Bab el-Mandeb lies farther south. Zuqar is therefore near the approaches to the strait, not the island sitting inside its narrowest passage. Confusing those positions would blur the difference between this island group and the strait's own immediate geography.

The Red Sea separates northeastern Africa from the Arabian Peninsula. At its southern outlet, Bab el-Mandeb leads into the Gulf of Aden and onward towards the Arabian Sea. Yemen lies on the Arabian side; Djibouti and Eritrea form the African side of the southern gateway region. Farther north, the Suez Canal connects the Red Sea system with the Mediterranean. These connections make the corridor important for voyages between Europe and Asia. They do not imply that every vessel near Zuqar was undertaking the same long-distance journey.

Why a nearby coast does not settle sovereignty

Eritrea and Yemen disputed sovereignty over several Red Sea islands as well as their maritime boundary. They agreed in October 1996 to arbitration in two stages. The first award, dated 9 October 1998, addressed territorial sovereignty. It found that the Zuqar–Hanish group, including Jabal Zuquar Island, belonged to Yemen. Other island groups were awarded to Eritrea. The decision was therefore not a blanket allocation of every offshore island to one state. Nor did it simply apply a rule that the closest mainland coast must always determine ownership.

The case was decided by an arbitral tribunal, with the Permanent Court of Arbitration serving as administering institution. It should not be described as a judgment by the International Court of Justice. In a second award on 17 December 1999, the tribunal delimited the maritime boundary. Determining who has sovereignty over an island and determining the boundary between neighbouring maritime entitlements are related but different tasks. The sequence matters: the 1998 sovereignty finding and the 1999 boundary award were not the same decision issued on one date.

The first award also required preservation of the traditional fishing regime, including access and enjoyment for fishermen from both countries. This was an important human dimension of the settlement. A sovereignty ruling did not mean disregarding the longstanding livelihoods that crossed the water between the coasts. At the same time, that historical regime should not be presented as a current guarantee of safe navigation during conflict. The legal settlement describes rights between states; present security conditions require their own evidence.

The island's volcanic form has a separate geological explanation

The Smithsonian classifies Zukur as a shield volcano within the Red Sea Rift Volcanic Province. Shield volcanoes generally develop a broad form as relatively fluid lava spreads over the ground. The island also contains smaller volcanic features: cones built from fragmented material, spatter cones and lava domes. Spatter cones accumulate blobs of lava that are still molten when they land and weld together. A cone made from erupted fragments differs from a surface built mainly by lava flowing and solidifying. More viscous lava can accumulate close to a vent rather than travelling far. These differences help explain why one volcanic island can contain several kinds of landform.

One characteristic surface is pāhoehoe: lava that solidifies with a relatively smooth, billowy or rope-like texture. The name describes a lava-flow form, not a separate island or mineral. It contrasts with ‘a‘ā, whose surface is rough and broken into jagged material. These Hawaiian terms are used internationally for comparable lava textures. They should not be read as evidence that Zuqar's volcano formed through the same tectonic setting as Hawaii. Similar-looking lava surfaces can occur in different geological settings.

The Smithsonian also records coastal cones and small islands formed by phreatic eruptions. These are steam-driven explosions: water is heated by hot rock, magma or volcanic deposits and expands violently. That mechanism differs from simply picturing a river of molten lava pouring from a crater. The programme does not supply a known date for Zukur's last eruption. Its description of youthful-looking flows is a geological observation, not an announcement of an eruption during the present news incident. The security story and the island's volcanic origin must not be fused into one event.

Strategic importance is about a network, not one island alone

The United States Energy Information Administration identifies Bab el-Mandeb as a maritime chokepoint: a narrow passage on a heavily used sea route. Disruption there can affect access between the Indian Ocean and the Suez route. Some vessels may instead travel around southern Africa, increasing distance, time and shipping costs. That explains why events in the southern Red Sea attract attention beyond Yemen. It does not mean that an incident near Zuqar automatically closes the strait, blocks every ship or proves control of the entire corridor.

Conclusion

The immediate development was India's report that the 14 nationals were safe, alongside continuing work on their welfare and possible return. Responsibility for the reported incident remained a separate question. Zuqar's importance becomes clearer when its location, Yemeni sovereignty, neighbouring coasts and connection to the southern Red Sea corridor are explained together. Its volcanic landforms add physical context, but neither geography nor an older legal award can substitute for evidence about a particular vessel's experience.