FOR the naval commanders tasked with anti-piracy operations off Somalia, the problem is a question of balance.
The risk-reward balance for pirates is weighted far too much in the favour of reward, they tell us. In other words, there is still no reason not to be a pirate.
Meanwhile, they are balancing the resources at their disposal. Five state of the art warships and a budget of €80m ($100.9m) for the European Union’s Operation Atlanta may sound impressive, but patrolling an area of 4m square miles is a challenge.
What is needed now as a matter of urgency is a clear and effective set of legal instruments that will offer a genuine deterrent.
Frustrated operators may scoff at the EU’s stated concerns over human rights for pirates and ask why these issues need even to be addressed when dealing with those who would threaten the lives of innocent seafarers. But there is delicate diplomatic balance at play here.
A legal framework to prosecute pirates must be effective and it must be seen to work. For that to happen any agreement must be above reproach.
Already we have see concerns being raised that the drive by the United Nations and other key players to legalise the transfer of Somali pirates by foreign navies to a court in a coastal country is a “rendition programme” with a UN stamp. Such critics are wrong. This is a clear case of illegal acts on the high seas being prosecuted under international law.
But only once we have a robust, fair and transparent framework for dealing with this problem will we truly be able to say we have shifted the balance back in favour of the seafarer.
