Perceptions on Piracy
Scholars and Intellectuals Weigh In
Derwin Munroe—Department of Political Science, University of Michigan Flint
Piracy is a “settled” issue in international affairs. Since the 1800s, states developed “customary” norms and practices and widely embraced treaties that make maritime piracy (defined as an attack on or seizure of persons and property on the high seas) an illegal activity under international law. States already have broad powers to punish those involved. Recent incidents of piracy around Somalia are troubling, however. The appearance of increasingly organized groups is not in itself shocking, as piracy has been on the rise in the coastal waters of several regions of the world since the 1980s. Indian Ocean piracy points to broader problems. It highlights the cost of the global neglect of “failed states” like Somalia; the maritime ecological damage (commercial over-fishing) that contributes to the economic desperation; the vulnerability of travel and commerce to armed attack in spite of the celebration of globalization and of the profits made from the falling cost of shipping; the mounting evidence that the global arms trade and the financial circuits that facilitate money laundering were not dented by the US-led ‘war on terror’; the weakness of state responses and the inadequacy of prophylactic measures like naval quarantine even with a powerful naval presence; and finally, the way that states can weaken international law and the International Criminal Court while using domestic courts as the venue for prosecution. The recent Indian Ocean events illustrate how the international system is more fragile and “unsettled”.
Trisha Jain—University of Michigan Ross School of Business ‘13
In drawing a comparison between pirates in Somalia and Robin Hood’s band of Merry Men, it is crucial to first aggressively assert that this comparison does not condone the pirates’ actions; after all, the Merry Men never held AK-47s to an American captain’s head, Robin Hood did not victimize the entire international trading community, and the legendary group never aligned itself with the Al-Qaeda. The fact remains that although both groups are heavily storied (one by folklore, one by sensationalist journalism) as reckless and malicious outlaws, both were bred by the condition of poverty and therefore have ultimately fiscal motives. This is easily overlooked when pirates are depicted as cold-blooded criminal masterminds; in reality, they are little more than malnourished teenagers who have found one of very few remaining means to hydrate an economy parched by illegal commercial overfishing, toxin-dumping, and a crumbled government. Not only is their option viable, but it has also proven the most lucrative. In 2008, Somali pirates pulled in $80 million in ransom payments, giving them far more power than the government and the ability to reinvigorate – and thus gain the support of – destitute towns, in a manner not unlike that of Robin Hood.
It is evident, then, that taking drastic military action against these pirates would accomplish little because the breeding grounds would still exist: impoverished, war-torn towns with few career opportunities, grateful for any influx of wealth. The only other large influx of wealth comes from international donors, who, in April 2009, pledged over $250 million in aid to Somalia. Herein lies a diplomatic weapon; the United States must involve its fellow donors in an effort to alleviate the indigent state of the “breeding grounds” in Somalia. Furthermore, these donors should provide aid contingent upon the condition of piracy; withholding aid until hostages are released would instigate Somali civilian action against pirates. The role of Robin Hood must be completely dismantled, which is only plausible if poverty diminishes, civilians withdraw support, and doors open for former Merry Men.
Katharine Gammon—Freelance Science Writer
In the early 19th century, a fledgling nation called the United States was deeply engaged in a pirate war off an African coast. The new nation made several attempts to stop the plundering of trade ships: paying bribes, installing friendly interests as leaders, and waging all-out attacks all made little progress in ending the Barbary Wars. Heroes rose out the naval ranks – the image of valiant captain springs eternal – but in the end, it was the age of imperialism, when colonial countries took hold of north African nations, that caused pirates to stay ashore.
In this current age of plunder on the high seas, colonialism is no longer a mollifying force in the world. On the contrary, poverty caused by years of unequal trade relationships with rich nations is a driving force for pirates. Somalia is a stateless state. Environmental issues, such as illegal fishing and the dumping of toxins into the Gulf of Aden, may also play a role in driving piracy.
The United States of the 21st century must engage with the world at large to find a better method to deal with piracy. One suggestion has been to work through the United Nations using humanitarian aid as leverage – suspending civic improvement projects funded by international organizations or shutting off water to Mogadishu until hostages held by pirates have been released. Some say this form of punishment is unfair to Somali citizens, but it can also cause competing Somali clans to rise up to stop pirates in their own communities. Another path of engagement is through helping Somalia build a real government and restoring its waters to health. Obviously, that’s more difficult than sending in the snipers – but as history has shown, seismic shifts have to occur to keep piracy at bay.
Thanks to our sponsors:
Knight Insurance Agency
Shred Experts
Marcia's Fine Art and Custom Framing
Rummel Portrait Studios
Those Nature People