PIRACY
AND GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS
GEETA
MADHAVAN
Published in
The New Indian Express
Thursday 14 November 2013
Serious concerns have risen for the
international community with the resurgence of piracy in the last two decades. In
international law, piracy is considered to be the vilest of all crimes at
sea. Cicero, the Roman legal theorist,
summed up the perception of pirates thus: “For
a pirate is not included in the number of lawful enemies, but is the common
enemy of all …. an enemy with whom treaties
are in vain and war remains incessant”.
International law identifies pirates as communis hostis omnium: common enemy of all. Under international law,
therefore, all countries have a right to apprehend pirate ships, attack and
board them and bring the pirates to trial and punish them under their national laws.
Also all countries have jurisdiction to
capture pirates not only for piracy
committed within their territorial sea ( 12 nautical miles from their shores)
and over the waters they have control but also
for acts of piracy committed in
the high seas - the area that is considered as belonging to all mankind . Hot
pursuit of the pirates can also be done up to the territorial waters of another
country. This explains and justifies the recent actions taken by the
international community against piracy.
Piracy
attacks are concentrated in busy sea lanes of commerce through which much of the
world trade passes. The number of attacks on ships worldwide in 2013 have been
reported to be 206 although several attacks go unreported for various reasons
e.g. for reasons of insurance claims. Pirates
seize the ships and hold the crew as hostages demanding high ransom for the
release of these ships and their crew. Piracy has been re-established in modern
times as lucrative business and the modern day pirates use heavy duty firepower
like automatic weapons and rocket propelled grenades, satellite phones for
communications and other technologically advanced gadgets that allow them to
track the movements of ships. Pirates
also seize ocean-going fishing or merchant ships and then turn them into “mother
ship” and use them as base for further attacks on other ships. They force the
crew of the captured ships to sail within attacking distance of the
unsuspecting ships. These modern developments
in piracy has created the need for ships to install new technology to
warn and protect themselves and also has led to the practice of carrying armed
guards on board ships.
Four major maritime areas have been identified
where ships laden with cargo and oil tankers are most susceptible to attacks. The
areas are the : Gulf of Aden and the southern entrance to the Red Sea ;Gulf of
Guinea near Nigeria and Niger river delta; Malacca Straits between Indonesia
and Malaysia and the region around the Indian subcontinent. The international community is effectively
staving off the pirate attacks by conducting joint maritime military operations
and joint naval deployments for patrolling the waters. For instance, in the
Gulf of Aden - Russia, France, United Kingdom, India, China and the United
States are engaged in patrolling the waters.
Operation Ocean Shield is conducted by NATO in the Gulf of Aden and off
the Horn of Africa. The Djibouti Code of Conduct adopted in 2009 to repress
piracy has eighteen member countries of the western Indian Ocean region. There
are several such military operations and initiatives around the world that
clearly indicate that most countries are committed to fight piracy. India has
to protect 2.013 million square miles which is equal to almost two-thirds of its
land area. Most of the attacks by pirates have been in the waters surrounding
India and around India’s extended neighbourhood and have been by Indonesian and
Somali pirates. In the case of the ship Alondaro
Rainbow the Indonesian pirates were apprehended by the Indian Coast Guard
and the Indian Navy. India assumed jurisdiction and brought them to trial in
Mumbai and won the praise of the international community.
While the fight against piracy and the
protection of sea lanes has been quite successful resulting in a reduction in
the number of pirate attacks reported and in some cases these attacks have been
successfully thwarted; some major concerns have risen about the global
implications of the anti-piracy measures. In the face of danger to peace and security,
the anti-piracy measures adopted
could have other far reaching and less desirable consequences.
Like the counter terrorism measures adopted in the aftermath of 9/11which were
severely criticised, the desire to secure the seas and oceans could have
counter effect and create schisms in the global order.
The first concern is regarding the
presence of foreign naval powers in the territorial waters of other nations. Some
nations fear the presence of the navy of major international and regional powers as not only invasion of their
sovereign rights by the entry of armed
vessels into their territorial waters but also as a
strategy adopted for subtle geo- strategic balancing. For instance, China views
anti-piracy patrolling by the United States as an attempt by the United States
to place its naval ships closer to the Chinese mainland. India has had to face the suspicion of some of
its smaller neighbours, who are constantly voicing their apprehensions of supposed
hegemonic intentions and India’s desire to command the
seas. Malacca Straits, where
international patrolling has been welcomed by most sea faring nations, is the
territorial waters of Malaysia and Malaysia has fears about the constant
presence of foreign ships in the Straits. The old adage “he who seeks to rule
the land must rule the seas“ is seen as a possible revival of the old strategy
by powerful countries.
The second concern that needs to be
addressed is the expansion of the naval prowess of nations to combat piracy. There
is a well-founded fear that piracy could be used as an ostensible reason for
all major powers to increase their naval power and justify many nations
becoming “blue water” naval powers. There is a genuine fear that the theatre of
war will shift from land warfare to maritime warfare. This also stands to
reason in an era where countries are not only seeking to make themselves more
and more energy efficient and are favouring feverish activity to bring the energy
into their country by oil tankers and underwater pipelines. The unexploited
potentials of the deep sea bed can also become the cause for serious maritime conflicts
in the coming years. For example, China has protested India’s exploration for oil
in the contested South China Sea while Vietnam claims sovereignty over the
region and has backed India’s right to exploration. With scientific and
technological advancement one can envisage the increase of similar disputes in
the scramble for exploration rights in the deep seabed.
The third major concern is the new trend
of armed guards aboard merchant ships and armed anti-piracy vessels. . Armed
guards aboard ships and anti-piracy fighting ships of private firms are running
into trouble regularly for defying maritime law and flouting the principles of sovereignty.
In February 2012, the Italian ship Enrica Lexie shot and killed two Indian fishermen
off Kerala coast claiming that they suspected them to be pirates. In October 2013,
the US ship MV Seaman Guard Ohio carrying
35 assault rifles and more than 5000 rounds of ammunition was impounded for
entering Indian waters near Tamil Nadu without required permission. Under
international law only government authorized ships and war ships are allowed to
carry ammunitions and they have restrictions of movements. Private firms
obviously find anti-piracy measures like these lucrative businesses but there
is apprehension that armed guards aboard ships and anti-piracy ships of private
security firms may create a problem larger and more complex than the actual
problem of piracy. Out sourcing the protection of the seas and oceans may not
be best the long term solution but it could very well become a long term
complication.
