As anyone who has looked at maritime piracy will know, it is a criminal endeavor that is all about money, especially the money to be garnered by holding crews, vessels and cargoes for ransom. And, as an economic criminal activity, if no one pays the pirates they will eventually move on to some other more profitable things. This is a bit of a simplification, but not far off the general mark, and it is one of the reasons that I have felt that those in the shipping industry should not pay ransoms (as well as taking more effective preventive measures to safeguard their personnel).
At present, though, it remains a difficult proposition to take because ransoms are being paid and if you've ever sailed with mariners through piracy-prone waters, as I have, this view means you are potentially relegating those you know to being incarcerated by criminals in dire circumstances.
In a worst case scenario situation, they'll hopefully only be held for a few weeks or months. But then there is the ongoing case of Rachel and Paul Chandler. The British yachters have been held by Somali pirates since last October 22, spending over seven months in captivity. The couple have made another plea through the media to have the British government help them, and one has to wonder whether something can't be done to free them.
The case of the Chandlers raises all kinds of questions about how we should deal with pirates. For instance, there is the fact that these two older British sailors have been held for seven months with little chance their family or friends can pony up a hefty ransom to free them. So maybe the British government should intercede and repatriate the couple. Maybe a campaign to raise awareness of their plight would help force the British government to do something. But, then again, wouldn't that just play into the pirates' hands, and embolden them to attack more yachters?
Maybe some of those naval forces in the region could swoop in and rescue the couple, doing what Jack Bauer does on 24 each hour. But some might remember the French response to their citizens captured by Somali pirates a year ago (see here), which ended with the master of the yacht Le Tanit killed.
This is a difficult and unique case, and I have no complete solutions. But it's the first time in a while that I have actually thought that maybe the ransom should be paid to free the Chandlers.
Showing posts with label Robin Hood myths. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Robin Hood myths. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Dispelling the myth of Somali pirates as 'Robin Hoods'
The Toronto Star posted a piece in yesterday's online edition that continues to perpetuate the wrong idea about those Somalis engaging in attacks on vessels in the seas off the Horn of Africa. It's written by brothers Craig and Marc Kielburger, well-known Canadian activists for international children's rights and founders of Free The Children, though the article does little to advance the plight facing regular Somalis of any age.
The crux of their piece is the same as has been put forward by numerous others, namely that the actions of Somali pirates can be justified given the dire conditions facing those living ashore and, more importantly, the activities of foreign fishing vessels and illegal waste dumpers.
This is, in a word, bullcrap.
The authors mention one Somali facing trail for piracy in The Netherlands. According to his lawyer, the man, "[I]s a modern-day Robin Hood. Stealing from the ships of rich countries to give to poor families back in war-torn Somalia." Now, 'Robin Hood' certainly implies someone who supposedly steals from the rich to give to the poor, spreading the wealth around, so to speak. Well, Somali pirate gangs haven't exactly been doing that: see, for instance, the report from last week prepared by the BBC's Andrew Harding, about his visit to a pirate village and you'll see little in the way of economic improvement in the community. And if you could ask any Somalian about how they feel when food aid deliveries are disrupted by pirates attacking commercial vessels under charter to groups like the United Nations, I'm sure the response would be less than positive.
The article goes on to label those engaged in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU, to give it the term most commonly used) and waste dumping as also being pirates, stating that, "To the [Somali] fishermen, these ships are the pirates." Later, the Kielburgers add, "The international community needs to start pointing fingers at the other group of pirates — ones that hail from shores closer to our own. There are two groups of pirates off of the Horn of Africa. We need to bring all of them to justice."
The problem I have with pieces like this is that diminishes the violent attacks being perpetrated by Somali pirates, equating them with illegal fishing operations. Let me clear about my position here: Those foreigners engaging in over-fishing or the dumping of toxic waste are not pirates; they are many other things, but they are not pirates.
It seems to me that some are being duped into believing a sort of 'eco-warrior' myth about the pirates, one which appears more and more to be part of a concerted effort by Somali gangs to re-fashion their image and play to the heart-strings of Westerners. And these slow, Summer months - slow for pirates - provide the perfect opportunity for their spokespeople and supporters to push this agenda in the media. After all, if there are fewer violent attacks going on in the region's seas, any tales of Robin Hood-like Somalis will not be offset by the reality of armed men boarding passing vessels and threatening their crews.
As well, if the Somali pirates were really serious about defending their waters against over-fishing and other illegal activities, one would assume they'd be using their formidable firepower and nautical prowess to patrol and secure those self-same seas. But when was the last time you heard of some 'Somali coastguards' scaring off fishing trawlers or working with foreign naval vessels to deal with this issue?
More to the point, the issues of illegal fishing and waste dumping are not something new; these activities began back in the 1990s. Though to read many of the articles that bring this up, they would appear to be recent phenomena. It was a trigger - one of several, in fact - but not the only reason for piracy to explode off the Horn of Africa.
Check out Daniel Howden's piece in last weekend's Sunday Independent, out of South Africa. it's a far more nuanced and detailed look at how one Somali man went from mechanic to fisherman to pirate to prisoner. And though he is clearly angry about over-fishing, the man - Farrah Ismail - says that much of this activity happened well over a decade ago, with the turning point being an attack by Somalis on a Kenyan trawler in 1997.
In Ismail's own words, he has little sympathy for mariners he and others have preyed upon. "I don't give a shit about them...They are like cattle to me, these ships are mine. Why don't you give consideration about the destruction they did to us?" before adding, "Finally, the rest of the world knows that hijacking ships was a punishment from us."
Anger, greed, corruption, lawlessness...these are what have driven men like Ismail to become pirates, not some egalitarian ideals. One does not attack aid vessels while espousing a moral high ground, to say nothing of targeting pleasure boaters or passing tugs.
Earlier today the Dutch freighter MV Marathon was released after being hijacked on May 7. Of its crew of eight Ukrainian seafarers, one was killed when the pirates attacked, while a second was wounded. Is the death of this mariner justified by the actions of other seafarers? I don't believe so.
There are currently at least fourteen vessels and possibly as many as 200 seafarers being held captive by Somali pirates. And while some of the vessels may have been engaged in illegal activities at the time of their capture, most had nothing to do with what's going ashore in Somalia, or off its coastline. (As today's Reuters Factbox reveals, among the captive ships are tugs and barges, a catamaran and a dredging vessel that was sailing some 370 nautical miles off the Somali coast while en route to the Seychelles.)
There are many types of criminals to be found in the seas off the Horn of Africa, but only one group are pirates.
The crux of their piece is the same as has been put forward by numerous others, namely that the actions of Somali pirates can be justified given the dire conditions facing those living ashore and, more importantly, the activities of foreign fishing vessels and illegal waste dumpers.
This is, in a word, bullcrap.
The authors mention one Somali facing trail for piracy in The Netherlands. According to his lawyer, the man, "[I]s a modern-day Robin Hood. Stealing from the ships of rich countries to give to poor families back in war-torn Somalia." Now, 'Robin Hood' certainly implies someone who supposedly steals from the rich to give to the poor, spreading the wealth around, so to speak. Well, Somali pirate gangs haven't exactly been doing that: see, for instance, the report from last week prepared by the BBC's Andrew Harding, about his visit to a pirate village and you'll see little in the way of economic improvement in the community. And if you could ask any Somalian about how they feel when food aid deliveries are disrupted by pirates attacking commercial vessels under charter to groups like the United Nations, I'm sure the response would be less than positive.
The article goes on to label those engaged in illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU, to give it the term most commonly used) and waste dumping as also being pirates, stating that, "To the [Somali] fishermen, these ships are the pirates." Later, the Kielburgers add, "The international community needs to start pointing fingers at the other group of pirates — ones that hail from shores closer to our own. There are two groups of pirates off of the Horn of Africa. We need to bring all of them to justice."
The problem I have with pieces like this is that diminishes the violent attacks being perpetrated by Somali pirates, equating them with illegal fishing operations. Let me clear about my position here: Those foreigners engaging in over-fishing or the dumping of toxic waste are not pirates; they are many other things, but they are not pirates.
It seems to me that some are being duped into believing a sort of 'eco-warrior' myth about the pirates, one which appears more and more to be part of a concerted effort by Somali gangs to re-fashion their image and play to the heart-strings of Westerners. And these slow, Summer months - slow for pirates - provide the perfect opportunity for their spokespeople and supporters to push this agenda in the media. After all, if there are fewer violent attacks going on in the region's seas, any tales of Robin Hood-like Somalis will not be offset by the reality of armed men boarding passing vessels and threatening their crews.
As well, if the Somali pirates were really serious about defending their waters against over-fishing and other illegal activities, one would assume they'd be using their formidable firepower and nautical prowess to patrol and secure those self-same seas. But when was the last time you heard of some 'Somali coastguards' scaring off fishing trawlers or working with foreign naval vessels to deal with this issue?
More to the point, the issues of illegal fishing and waste dumping are not something new; these activities began back in the 1990s. Though to read many of the articles that bring this up, they would appear to be recent phenomena. It was a trigger - one of several, in fact - but not the only reason for piracy to explode off the Horn of Africa.
Check out Daniel Howden's piece in last weekend's Sunday Independent, out of South Africa. it's a far more nuanced and detailed look at how one Somali man went from mechanic to fisherman to pirate to prisoner. And though he is clearly angry about over-fishing, the man - Farrah Ismail - says that much of this activity happened well over a decade ago, with the turning point being an attack by Somalis on a Kenyan trawler in 1997.
In Ismail's own words, he has little sympathy for mariners he and others have preyed upon. "I don't give a shit about them...They are like cattle to me, these ships are mine. Why don't you give consideration about the destruction they did to us?" before adding, "Finally, the rest of the world knows that hijacking ships was a punishment from us."
Anger, greed, corruption, lawlessness...these are what have driven men like Ismail to become pirates, not some egalitarian ideals. One does not attack aid vessels while espousing a moral high ground, to say nothing of targeting pleasure boaters or passing tugs.
Earlier today the Dutch freighter MV Marathon was released after being hijacked on May 7. Of its crew of eight Ukrainian seafarers, one was killed when the pirates attacked, while a second was wounded. Is the death of this mariner justified by the actions of other seafarers? I don't believe so.
There are currently at least fourteen vessels and possibly as many as 200 seafarers being held captive by Somali pirates. And while some of the vessels may have been engaged in illegal activities at the time of their capture, most had nothing to do with what's going ashore in Somalia, or off its coastline. (As today's Reuters Factbox reveals, among the captive ships are tugs and barges, a catamaran and a dredging vessel that was sailing some 370 nautical miles off the Somali coast while en route to the Seychelles.)
There are many types of criminals to be found in the seas off the Horn of Africa, but only one group are pirates.
Labels:
illegal fishing,
Robin Hood myths,
Somali piracy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
