Security gaps muddy waters for Malaysia’s blue economy ambitions

Foreign trawlers slip into waters off the Malaysian state of Terengganu under cover of darkness, local fishermen say, working near Pulau Redang and Pulau Bidong before leaving by dawn to avoid detection.
The incursions have become a recurring problem for fishermen along the eastern coast of Peninsular Malaysia, where the South China Sea separates Malaysia from Vietnam by just hundreds of kilometres.
Alias Yahya, who sits on the board of the Terengganu fishermen’s group Penentu, said members had reported what they believed were Vietnamese vessels in Malaysian waters at night.
“These Vietnamese trawlers usually enter Malaysian waters at night, when enforcement by the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency and other authorities is lighter, and leave after about five to six hours at dawn,” he said.
Beyond being a local grievance, these incursions also expose a larger weakness in Malaysia’s ocean ambitions.
As the country pursues the blue economy – the sustainable use of marine, coastal and inland water resources for growth, jobs, food security and environmental protection – the complaints point to a central test: whether Malaysia can govern what happens at sea.
“Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is not merely a question of lost marine resources, but also threatens the survival of local fishing communities and the sustainability of the country’s marine ecosystem,” Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA) Director General Maritime Admiral Rosli Abdullah said.
Malaysia’s blue economy agenda was discussed at the national economic council meeting, chaired by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim on March 12.

The Malaysia Blue Economy Blueprint 2026–2040 outlines a long-term plan to sustainably develop marine, coastal and inland water resources, with policies and initiatives under the plan projected to contribute 1.07 trillion ringgit (US$260 billion) to GDP by 2040.
The projected gains are expected to come from both established and emerging sectors – including fisheries, aquaculture, maritime transport, marine tourism, renewable energy, marine biotechnology and desalination.
But many of those industries depend on the same basic condition: Malaysia’s ability to monitor and protect its waters.
In 2024, the MMEA detained 84 foreign fishing vessels, while another 33 were caught in 2025, bringing the total to 117 vessels over the period. The operations also led to the arrest of 572 foreign crew members in 2024 and 749 in 2025.
Most of the vessels and their crew were from Vietnam, followed by Indonesia and Thailand, according to the agency.
The MMEA has previously estimated that illegal fishing costs the country up to 6 billion ringgit a year. According to a 2023 study, Malaysia suffered US$1.4 billion in economic losses in 2019 alone.
IUU fishing remains among the main challenges for the industry, according to Department of Fisheries Director General Adnan Hussain.
He said IUU fishing in Malaysia was not limited to foreign vessel encroachment but also included unlicensed fishing, the use of prohibited gear, breaches of licensing conditions and inaccurate and unreported catch.
“The impact is not limited to violations of the law but also has implications for the sustainability of fish stocks, the health of marine ecosystems, the welfare of fishing communities and national food security,” he said.

Missing link
Security experts say Malaysia’s challenge reflects a wider gap in blue economy planning: governments are setting ambitious targets for ocean growth while the agencies responsible for protecting those waters often operate in separate policy silos.
“Maritime security appears to be for the blue economy what the rule of law is on land,” said Leonardo Jacopo Maria Mazzucco, a maritime security analyst at Gulf State Analytics, a Washington-based geopolitical risk consultancy.
The blue economy is rooted in sustainable development, climate and conservation agendas, while maritime security has traditionally been the domain of law enforcement agencies, resulting in a blind spot.
“The missing link is the integration of maritime security into blue economy planning,” he said.
Economic development could not exist without protection, said Nazery Khalid, a senior fellow at the Maritime Institute of Malaysia.
“It is paramount and crucial to Malaysia’s economy to be protected from maritime security threats posed by smugglers, sea robbers, pirates and terrorists,” he said.
Blue economy sectors, from fisheries and shipping to tourism and ports, could all be affected if these threats were not contained, he said.
Rosli Azad Khan, a Malaysia-based transport economist, said maritime security risks could inflate operating costs, disrupt supply chains and undermine port security across Asia.
While disruptions in unsafe surrounding waters could create short-term opportunities for ports such as Port Klang and Tanjung Pelepas by diverting vessels there, they also risk causing congestion, equipment shortages and logistics bottlenecks, he said.
“Maritime security and a strong blue economy are deeply interdependent because without secure waters and resilient logistics, sustainable ocean wealth cannot be realised and protected,” Rosli said.

Clear case for transparency
Malaysia is not alone in facing that gap. At the 11th Our Ocean Conference in Mombasa, Kenya, governments and ocean advocates put vessel transparency and illegal fishing at the centre of blue economy governance.
On Wednesday, 15 countries, including South Korea, France, Peru and Somalia, adopted the Mombasa Declaration, committing to data-sharing and vessel transparency to combat illegal fishing.
One of the clearest security gaps is the lack of public information, according to Maisie Pigeon, senior director of global transparency at Oceana, an ocean conservation advocacy group.
She said governments should make public data such as vessel identifiers, authorisations, sanctions, ownership, flag states and fishing activity.
The more information that was accessible, the better the policies governments could make, she said. “If that information is not public, then these bad practices are allowed to continue unobstructed.”
In regions such as Southeast Asia, where small-scale fishing communities work alongside industrial fleets, transparency was needed not only for fisheries management but also for maritime security, she said.
“Understanding who is there, and if they are supposed to be there, would enable greater maritime security to combat IUU fishing,” she said.
Governments could not manage what they could not see, said David Kroodsma, chief scientist at Global Fishing Watch.
“Fish don’t respect national boundaries,” he said.
As warming seas push fish stocks into new areas, governments need reliable public data on who is fishing, where vessels are operating and how much is being taken.
“All the stresses compound,” Kroodsma said, pointing to overfishing, illegal fishing, industrial competition and climate change. “Transparency has to be at the base.”
This story was produced as part of the 2026 Our Ocean Conference Fellowship organised by Internews’ Earth Journalism Network.