India Rejects Pakistan's Naval Collision Allegations on September 18, Says PNS Hunain Conducted Unsafe Manoeuvre Violating 1991 Agreement

India rejected Pakistan's claims over the September 15 naval collision between INS Kolkata and PNS Hunain in the Arabian Sea, with MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal calling Pakistan's response the usual prevarication on September 18. Jaiswal said INS Kolkata was on routine deployment in the western Arabian Sea when PNS Hunain conducted itself in an unacceptable and unprofessional manner that resulted in the collision. The dangerous overtaking manoeuvre by PNS Hunain was in gross violation of Article 10 of the Agreement between India and Pakistan on Advance Notice on Military Exercises, Manoeuvres and Troops Movements of April 1991, which specifies that naval units at sea are not to be within three nautical miles of each other. In addition, the Pakistani ship also infringed the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea. Pakistan has been advised about the need for all military units to exercise due care and respect the provisions of the relevant agreements between the two sides to prevent any repeat of such incidents. The incident did not cause any major damage to the Indian ship, while PNS Hunain suffered a massive dent on the front arch and has returned to harbour for repairs. INS Kolkata has continued with its operational deployment, escorting ships coming in from the Gulf of Oman. India summoned Pakistan's Charge d'Affaires on September 16 and lodged a strong protest. This is the second major public exchange over the September 15 collision, underscoring the fragility of confidence-building measures in the Arabian Sea at a time when both navies are conducting intensive operations in international waters. The fact that INS Kolkata sustained no major damage and remains operationally deployed while PNS Hunain required immediate harbour return for repairs reinforces India's version that the Pakistani vessel initiated unsafe manoeuvring. The invocation of the 1991 bilateral agreement and international collision regulations frames the incident as both a