THE risks and deprivations faced by the sailing community, who despite these threats, relentlessly continue the seaborne trade that is so vital to the economies world-wide, are enormous. It is imperative that the fight against the scourge of piracy is seen and addressed in the correct perspective. The menace of sea piracy emanating off the coast of Somalia is slowly spreading its octopus like tentacles along the coast of Africa and extending deep towards the vast expanse of the Indian Ocean.
Taking full advantage of the permissive environment in the failed state of Somalia, where job opportunities are non-existent, the way ward, poor and unemployed youth are readily available to be exploited by nefarious elements. These forces inimical to peace, distant from Africa, provide it subtle backing and have a stranglehold control over this lucrative business. They propagate quick money gains and the soft option of rags to riches, which encourages piracy. Year by year piracy is growing, with pirates extracting huge ransom payments running into millions of dollars.
Financial implications
The Joint War Committee has declared the piracy infested waters as enclosed on the north-west by the Red Sea, west of the Gulf of Oman along longitude 58° East, on the East along longitude 78° East and to the south along Latitude 12° South (see map). |
| About 400 merchant ships are in the high risk area at any given time. Diplomatic initiatives with other nations must be taken to ensure mutual understanding and if need be, develop links covertly or overtly, for deep penetration into the stronghold of piracy. There is also a lesson to be learnt from decisive anti-pirate operations taken by the US |
The International Maritime Organisation has highlighted that piracy worldwide reached an all time high in 2011, during which 544 attacks were reported. It is estimated that pirates took in 160 million dollars and a study predicts this figure to go up to 400 million dollars by 2015. Compared to this, the logistics and functional cost of this highly established and structured business is negligible. All it needs is a small investment in boats and arms, the manpower requirements drawn from the unemployed youth are readily at hand, who mostly under the effect of intoxicants, get easily enamored by the propaganda of quick gains.
Who exactly are the beneficiaries of this uncontrolled loot is oft debated. Who is making most of the money, while the sun of piracy shines? Are these the African pirates who represent the visible front face and seen on the wrong side of the law; or, are these the back office white collar pirates in the form of insurance companies, the arms and equipment manufacturers, the private maritime security companies (PMSC) providing armed guards, the negotiators who include lawyers and a host of other elements? This enormous loot is a self propellant, which only fuels piracy and makes it eradication a difficult proposition. Rumored whispers claim that the pirates who form the sword arm as the boarding team get only 10 per cent of the ransom money, 15 per cent goes to the African operations headman and a whopping 75 per cent finds its way out of Africa!
It is estimated that about 400 ships that are in the high risk area at any given time, voluminously add to the financial pie. These ships take additional insurance cover estimated at 8 million dollars a week, the PMSCs providing armed guards charge 4,500 dollars per day, the kidnap and ransom negotiators (KRN) charge 200,000 to 400,000 dollars for negotiating. Ransom money it seems is further insured, the private aircraft companies who take the responsibility to drop the ransom charge up to 150,000 dollars, besides the lawyers and a host of others. Reportedly, majority of the controls and the negotiators are based in Europe.
Money losses apart, the safety of the sailors is of major concern for Asian countries, particularly India, Philippines and China, and those from the erstwhile Soviet Block, who provide majority of the sailors. It is in this back drop that the theme for the 26th Asia Pacific Roundtable at Kuala Lumpur in May, was Asian Security Governance and Order. During the roundtable, Prime Minister Datuk Najib, of Malaysia, emphasised that Asia needed to change its mind set and take greater responsibility for its security and must specially cater for security at sea to protect the large percentage of Asian crews manning merchant marine fleets the world over.
Government response
In the past, the Indian Government's response in particular has been lukewarm, merely reiterating that keeping in view the need to comply with international law, it is difficult to react proactively. However, for the record, it was the Indian Navy which took one of the first actions against pirates along the Somalia coast, but that action has since been down played and a tight muzzle placed over this readily available effective dissuading force. On the other hand, the same international law does not seem to hold good for some countries. A glaring contrast is the much publicised case of pirates attacking and hijacking an American ship, Maersk Alabama, where the five day standoff ended when US Navy SEALs went into action on April 12, 2009 and got the American crew and vessel released. There is a lesson to learn from the American attitude, when it comes to American lives and interests, no international rules or agreements hold good. Another example, though in a milder and different way, is that of the European Union (EU) Navy in May. The EU forces carried out a disruptive action against known pirate supplies and equipment along the coast of Somalia. Post action, a very cautious and carefully worded statement released by the EU commander stated that the action undertaken was merely to show full sympathy for the local Somali people and fishermen, and it emphasised that at no point did EU boots step ashore. In response, the pirates threatened dire consequences on the seamen held hostage. From this it is evident, that such half hearted operations cannot be a permanent solution, well knowing that no war is ever won without the boots landing ashore.
The other end of the reaction spectrum does not involve western countries. On May 10, around 250 nautical miles from Ras Al Madrakah, Oman, ten armed pirates in two skiffs chased a crude oil tanker. It took anti piracy measures, increased speed, made evasive maneuvers and managed to evade the first boarding attempt. The pirates regrouped in their skiffs, linked with the mother ship in the vicinity and launched a second attack. This time, approaching at a high speed they managed to successfully board and hijack the vessel taking the crew hostage. The tanker carrying 135,000 tonnes of crude was commanded by an Indian captain and manned with a crew of 11 Indian, 14 Filipinos and 1 Romanian. There was no concrete reaction to this incident.
The hijacking clearly indicates that there is a prolonged time gap between the sighting of pirates and raising the alarm before the final act of a hijacking. However none of the military forces deployed in the region, be it NATO, Oman, EU or Iran, made any proactive attempt to negate the hijacking or take any follow up action. Given that the place was distant from Indian shores, an immediate proactive action was not feasible, but even subsequent responses were markedly adrift and wanting. Satellite tracking later pinpointed the ship at anchor, off Somalia, north of Bandar Bella, at a pirate hub. There was a rather meek, embarrassing reaction from the Director General of Shipping (DGS), asking the Mumbai-based recruiting agent to obtain information on the condition of the Indians onboard the vessel. This shows the neglect to such matters, because, as per norms the DGS is continuously kept abreast of the position of every vessel transiting this high risk area with details of the nationality of its crew.
Insurance factor
Another issue being circumvented is regarding insurance companies that respond only where an insured ship owner has a legal liability. There is no legal requirement or obligation to pay ransom, as it is not covered by insurance companies despite the fact that any payment made by a shipping company as ransom is likely to be extremely high. However, after the piracy nightmare has been enacted, insurance companies step in again with their post piracy humanitarian response programme to mitigate the risk of piracy induced mental trauma for seafarers, which is beyond comprehension of those who have never been in such situations. Hijackers detain ships ranging from six weeks to eight months, torture crew and are now even resorting to inhuman measures like chopping off limbs of the captives to expedite extortion of ransom.
The advocacy of best management practices for on board staff to fight back the pirates is totaling misplaced. Merchant mariners are not trained combatants; their evasive or proactive actions have limitations. They are no match to the inhuman tactics adopted by the pirates who are armed with automatic weapons and hand grenades. Backed and reinforced by mother ships, the pirates approach the targeted slow moving vessel in high speed boats giving them no scope to escape. The pirates are resolute in their intent, and are mostly under the effects of hallucinogens perpetrating schizophrenic behavior and once onboard, they are known to run amok. It is reported that this unpredictable behaviour is the result of chewing khat, a drug made from a Somali plant.
Setting course for future
India and Asia have to respond and stand up to protect their citizens. To reduce this threat, a two pronged strategy is necessary. Firstly, the Asian countries concerned must have a response plan and put in place an Asian security net in this high risk area that authorises hot pursuit and elimination of such vagabonds. Secondly, develop streams to divert the money reaching the primary recipients. As far as India is concerned, they need to adopt new measures. First, the Indian insurances companies must develop financial muscle to cover the risk of vessels transiting the area and look to exploit business and have a stake in the maritime sector. Secondly, the land based security companies in India should develop into PMSC that would provide security guards on board the vessels. For such employment, there is no dearth of trained ex-servicemen. Thirdly, there is a need to enact special laws applicable in this high risk area, which besides other appropriate laws must include one which forbids another craft to approach within 150 meters of the ships and, if they do so, same is at their own risk. The security guards must be covered by law to avoid unwarranted legal actions. Having said that, security guards must exercise due diligence and follow the rule of minimum force to avoid repeat of an event like that of the Italian guards killing innocent Indian fishermen. Fourthly, India must exploit its long association with African countries. Diplomatic initiatives must be taken to ensure mutual understanding and if need be develop links, covertly or overtly, for deep penetration into the stronghold of piracy. The drying up of the money, coupled with harsher rules will help to eradicate this menace.
India has to flex its muscles and show its strength in international waters. The recent initiative by India and China to periodically exchange views with each other on maritime trade and security and the grouping of naval ships of these two Asian giants with that of Japan and South Korea in anti-piracy patrols in infested waters from July 1 are welcome steps.
