Ramifications of the West in the Fight against Piracy in the Gulf of Guinea

The support from the government of Denmark to countries in the Gulf of Guinea.

The Gulf of Guinea has been described as the safest route for international trade many decades ago until recently when pirates shifted their attention to the Western and Eastern coasts of Africa to make fortune. The Gulf of Guinea, today, is undergoing a rapid transition linked to the activities of criminals in the sub-regions drawing their inspiration from the poor management of the maritime area. Maritime security challenges can be examined both at the national level, and regional level; thus, the urgent need to put quick and effective maritime governance measures in place to mitigate the consequences on both the flag state and or the port state. The complexity surrounding the definition of maritime security makes it difficult to establish the particular area that need to be tackled.

Freedom C. ONUOAHA (2013)  defines maritime security as “ the freedom from or absence of those acts which could negatively impact on the natural integrity and resilience of any navigable waterways or undermine the safety of persons, infrastructure, cargo, vessels and other conveyances legitimately existing in, conducting lawful transactions on, or transiting through territorial and international waterways”.

The definition of ONUOAHA encompasses almost all aspects of maritime security, and therefore, navigations ought to be free provided the legality of the trade is not breached. Maritime security has become the greatest concern for every country worldwide. According to UNCTAD’s (the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 2020) report, about 80% of transport around the word is made by sea and even more in developed countries. The maritime domain does not only serve as the major route for international trade but it is also endowed with massive wealth, including minerals, hydrocarbon deposits and other marine and fish resources indispensable for human survival. It is as a matter of importance to know the coverage of the Gulf of Guinea that could be converted to the effort needed to ensure maritime security. It stretches from the coastal areas of Senegal through to Angola including the islands of Cape Verde and Sao Tome and Principe. It is common currency to hear of piracy such us drug trafficking, arms trafficking, human trafficking, hostage taking, kidnapping, vessel to vessel transhipment, illegal fishing… in the Gulf of Guinea today and therefore the need to safeguard the economic exclusive zone of the Gulf against these illegal practices. Even though it is the responsibility of every state to ensure the safety of its territorial waters, one tends to query the possible motives of the Danish government in providing support to states to fighting piracy in the Gulf of Guinea? Many theories may be helpful to analyse this trend, but for the purpose of consistency and clarity, this research shall examine the theories of globalisation in one hand and Hans Morgenthau and Kenneth Waltz theories of realism and Neo-realism on the other hand.

Maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea has taken a different trajectory affecting the global tendencies these recent years. The Atlantic Ocean considered as a safer route for maritime trade and for free movement of vessels across the world became a nightmare and which need a faster, more effective and sustainable measures to redeem its image from piracy. Years ago, the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea through the Suez Canal were at the helm of sea passage of vessels. The route was believed to be shorter and cost-effective where maximum profit could be generated per the assumptions of capitalists. The incessant attacks on vessel by Somalia pirates in the Suez Canal to finance terrorism and internal war through monies generated through ransom, compelled may international corporations and other non-state actors to put pressure on their various governments to find a safer route for maritime trade. The Gulf of Guinea becomes the alternative even though it is longer. However, the world became surprised in the wake of the first ever oil theft on this new route, therefore the need to find measures and strategies to protect, secure and preserve the maritime passage along the Gulf of Guinea. Theories of globalisation argued that this can only be achieved through cooperation, collaboration, coordination, technology sharing for the best interest of all.

Globalisation, according to Geoff Riley (2006) “is the process by which economies and cultures have been drawn deeper together and have become more interconnected through global networks of trade, capital flows and spread of technology and global media”.

The understanding of the definition of Riley instigates reflexions on the responsibilities of each states as actors on the international terrain to protect, preserve and ensure the sustainability of the affairs of its international corporate entities which may be considered as non-state actors but with power to influence governments. So, the intervention of the Danish government in the Gulf of Guinea to protect vessels, goods and other services not only substantiate its efforts to protect the interest of its non-state actors but also to exhibit its emergence in the economic dependency vis a vis the world. As an element of globalisation, the Danish, through cooperation is steadily achieving its core goal in the Gulf of Guinea. As stated far above, the Gulf of Guinea extends from the coast of Senegal to Angola with so many vessels navigating every day; therefore, maintaining good cooperation for the interest of both parties (Denmark and countries in the Gulf of Guinea) could go a long way in sustaining shipment. Copenhagen-based Maersk is the largest shipping industry worldwide navigating the waters with more than 30% trade in the Gulf of Guinea. Again, the justification of the Danish government on its intervention in the Gulf of Guinea is also based on the fact that Africa in general and West and East Africa in particular do not have the technological capabilities to fight piracy and protect civilians on board of vessels.

Therefore, the need to strengthen corporation as far as technology is concerned with governments for intervention.

This corporation both at strategic level- training of naval officer, marine coastal guards and others stakeholders, technical level- provision of speed boats, air patrols and special equipment to deter pirates and the division of the gulf into zones- are some  of the cooperative measures put in place to fight piracy, especially hostage taking by Nigerian pirates. In a way, this can be seen as a shared interest for both parties in the international system. Corporation, furthermore, includes information gathering and sharing for the benefits of both parties. Due to the size of the Gulf of Guinea and the diversity and nature of piracy ranging from hijacking, oil bunkering, drugs trafficking, arms trafficking, human trafficking to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in the gulf by sometime unidentified people with the support of local authorities, it is quite important to call for external assistance to combat these ills affecting not only states in the gulf but the world as a global village.

It is also important not to lose sight on the fact that Africa, and particularly the Gulf of Guinea is lagging behind in terms of technology. Thereupon, the abetment in technology to these states can be legitimised as a benefit in countries where even internal security is questionable less alone security on the sea. This is to say that the technologies used are not only limited to identifying piracy in its various forms but also a tool to preserve the marine environment where most countries exploit oil offshore. Likewise, it is not only the interest of Denmark that is at stake, reason why there has been a lot of collaboration coordination among states, international organisations such as the International Maritime Organisations, Interpol, the UN office of Drugs and Crimes, multilateral naval missions, the private sector in the fight against piracy.

According to Jack Lang, the UN special adviser on piracy, ‘the race between the pirates and the international community is progressively being won by the pirates’. Based on this statement, there is a need to collaborate and coordinate efforts to win the war in the gulf. It is therefore the duty of all, even though the Danish government has taking the initiative to ensure that there is absolute freedom or absence of any act that put both vessels and the crew in jeopardy one need to think beyond self-interest and take measure, for what affects one affects all as we live in a global village.

However, this ideology is subjected to criticism in the sense that the components of aids and supports are not necessarily subject to globalisation. It can be considered as an act of control, ownership, self-centred interest. As argued by realists, human beings are egoists and desire power, therefore, one can say that the intervention of the Danish government in the Gulf of Guinea to protect the interest of its non-state actors or private sectors translates to the egoistic character of the government. Again, realism does not support claims of shared interest, because every state actor want supremacy over the other by use of power; either coercive power, referent power or offensive power to capture others for their national interest which will benefit its citizens. In addition to that, classical realism says human nature is destructive, hence it is difficult to predict its future occurrences. So, shared interest does not make up to cooperation.

It is very important to value the level of cooperation, because the perception is that the interest may not be mutually shared, and so there is a kind of dominance vis a vis the corporation. Again, the belief is that a cooperation should only be between two parties of the same equilibrium. Here is the case where one party is more affluent that the other. Clearly this idea stands as a flaw, because decisions are made solely by rational actors for the pursuit of national interest-Denmark is only pursuing its national interest in the Gulf of Guinea. Kenneth Waltz (1979) contends that states react in a defensive manner when it comes to protect their national interests. We can again concur that the weaknesses or vulnerability of the states within the gulf incapacitate them to bargain for mutual interest in the international system. This, therefore gives the upper hand to the Danish, and especially to the shipping companies to decide for the Gulf; what Hans Morgenthau (1948) will describe as an “anarchy” where government only seek their personal interest. Besides, there is a component of competition in the Gulf of Guinea, because not only Danish Maersk has its interests threatened. Therefore, we can conclude that the aids and supports provided to the states are not in a sense to equip the Gulf of Guinea to fight piracy but rather and expansionism ideology extended to the gulf for exploitation and command in the pursuit of their political bigotry.

Though neo-realists recognised structuralism, states are not necessarily dependent on these structures. As indicated earlier, states are in unitary competition, thus, Denmark’s act in the Gulf of Guinea should not unquestionably based on the characteristics of human nature, but in some points be measure against relative power vis a vis other states. Kenneth Waltz (1979) again suggested a different side of realism recommending the study of elements of international system instead of focusing in the weaknesses of human nature when dealing with other states.

In conclusion, the financial, strategic, technical and technological interventions from the government of Denmark to countries in the Gulf of Guinea can be classified as acts of shared interest that put the latter in the best position to fight piracy at al level. This is view as a cooperation, collaboration and coordination in the sense that Africa in general and West and East Africa in particular lack the necessary tools, and ability to face such challenges that affect not only the continent but also the whole world, owing to globalisation. It is important to acknowledge the role of non-state actors and the private sector such as shipping companies in their pursuit of safe and secure maritime milieu through their government to enable a more profitable shipping in the Gulf of Guinea where they mostly operate. As globalisation calls for shared information and technology for the protection and preservation of mutual interest there is a need for cooperation and the Gulf of Guinea is not exempted.

However, there is another view that sees all the components cited above as a pure exploitation and exhibition of domination, due to the fact that, the world is ruled by anarchy where powerful states want to dominate weaker or vulnerable states. This is the case of West and East Africa where there is a manifestation of supremacy, and exploitation from an emerging power to fuel their economic stability though an ideology that seem to be in disadvantage of the Gulf of Guinea sustained by what they called cooperation, coordination and collaboration in a world of globalisation. It is obvious through the ideology of realists that since there is no balance of power, so shall there be an imbalance in interest. Therefore, this kind of policy implemented in the Gulf of Guinea could not be in the interest of countries along the Gulf of Guinea, but a mean to exploitation.

By Koffi Mawunyo Obidiaba,

MA-International Relations and Diplomacy

Reference

1. IMO: Review of Maritime Transport, 2000
2. UNCTAD (the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development), report on maritime trade and development in the Gulf of Guinea 2020
3. Ham Greidanus, Marlene Alvarez, Torkild Eriksen, Thomas Barbas: “Shipping Distribution and Statistics in the Gulf of Guinea and Off West Africa”, 2013
4. Freedom C. ONUOAHA: “Piracy and Maritime Security in the Gulf of Guinea: Trends, Concerns and Propositions”, Dec 2013
5. Jack Lang, the UN’s Special Adviser on Legal Issues related to Piracy off the Coast of Somalia, 2013
6. Geoff Riley: “Globalization and its impacts on the world Economic development”, 2006
7. Klaus M. Leisinger: “The role of Law and Ethics in the Globalised Economy”, 2009
8. Christian Bueger: “Global Policy”, Vol. 4, Issue 1, Feb. 2013, pp 63-64
9. UN Security Council Meeting Protocol, 25^th January 2011. UN document S/PV. 6473
10. Stephen McGlinchey, Rosie Walters &Christian Scheinplug: “E- International Relations”, 2017
11. Hans Morgenthau: „über die Herkunft des Politischen aus dem Wesen des Menschen“. Container 151, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, 1930
12. Hans Morgenthau: “Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace”. 7^th New York, 1948
13. Hans Morgenthau : “Science : Servant or Master? ” 1962
14. Thomas Nagel: “The problem of Global Justice”. Philosophie and Public Affairs 33(3) pp 133-147
15. Kenneth Waltz: “Theory of International Politics”, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1979
16. Scott Burchill, Andrew Linklater, Richard Devetak, Jack Donnelly, Matthew Paterson, Christian Reus-Smit and Jacqui True: “Theories of International Relations”, Third edition, 2005