South Africa’s Engagement in Counter-Piracy as a Foreign Policy Decision

By  Lisa Otto 

lisa picture

South Africa became involved as a counter-piracy actor rather late in the day, after repeated calls for it to make a contribution to the scourge that was then facing the continent – Somali piracy. Despite the rise of the Somali pirate problem coming in 2007, it was not until the outward ‘ballooning’ effect of the pirates’ reach began to extend southwards towards the Mozambican Channel, that South Africa’s interest was suitably piqued.

 In December 2010 Somali pirates struck off Mozambique’s coast, and the South African Department of Defence responded to this attack on its immediate neighbour by deploying warships to Mozambique. This effort was known as Operation Copper and constituted the very beginning of South Africa’s engagement in counter-piracy efforts beyond endeavours of verbal condemnation.

Not acting on its own recognisance, but rather generously acquiescing to Mozambique’s request for assistance, piracy was suddenly thrust from the periphery of South Africa’s international agenda to a more central position than it previously enjoyed. Albeit one that did yet not necessarily beget much strategic priority.

In February 2012, South Africa’s engagement in counter-piracy became formalised through a Memorandum of Understanding signed in partnership with Mozambique and Tanzania, under the auspices of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).  Subsequently the countries have seen some success, notably in April 2012 when the partnership was put to use to fend off a pirate attack in Tanzanian waters, in collaboration with the European Union (EU) deployment.

Beyond this, Operation Copper has also worked at training efforts as a capacity-building mechanism with neighbouring countries. More recently, South Africa has begun to focus its attentions the Gulf of Guinea also, with the navy being active there in the last two years.

At the time of South Africa’s entrance as an actor in the counter piracy environment, maritime piracy in Somalia had been a problem of global concern for some years. By 2011 this experience had led to a number of experts alluding to the emergence of a new hotspot for Somali pirates in Southern African waters. Given pirates’ dynamic nature and ability to adapt to the challenges they faced, the presence of international forces in the Gulf of Aden would force pirates further south in pursuance of their victims. The trend known as ballooning saw Somali pirates venture far afield.

It was this thinking that underpinned a theory that Southern Africa would soon face dealing with the pirate scourge. This notion, coupled with the need for security in the maritime domain in light of resource discoveries off the coast of Tanzania and Mozambique as well as the active ports at Dar es Salaam, Beira and Maputo seemed to necessitate action. This, along with the successful pirate attacks in Mozambican waters in 2010, the threat must have seemed quite real to South Africa, and potentially also posed a risk to its interests off Southern Africa’s eastern coastline.

Yet, the Somali pirate scourge dwindled significantly in 2012 and 2013 as a number of activities and developments both on land and at sea paid off. Beyond this, Somali pirates have not managed to sustain their campaign further into the Indian Ocean, and ultimately southwards, given logistical challenges. The absence of a safe haven outside Somalia, as well as having to go without the intricate support network in Somalia that provide the very foundations for their activities worsens matters. Establishing new such networks (which would require an environment devoid of effective governance comparable to the erstwhile Somalia) is a task more difficult in the Southern African region given its comparative condition of peace and security. Another option would be the use of a mother ship based in international waters, but this too would require access to a regular supply of food, water, fuel and other items, usually provided by on-shore networks contracted by pirate groups.

Given this and the limited defence budget in South Africa, it may seem curious that the country committed of its limited naval assets to these endeavours. In fact, the allocation to Operation Copper alone in the 2013 budget was R585 million (US$56 million) from a total annual budget of R40 billion (or US$3.9 billion).

Says defence analyst Helmoed Heitman, “either South Africa accepts regional security responsibilities and funds an appropriate defence force, or we wind our neck in, keep quiet and hope nothing goes wrong”. He posits that despite the role of a defence force being to address threats, the budget leaves no room for this, nor for the unexpected. Thus, one might conclude that the expenditure on counter-piracy operations is a frivolous expense, given the state’s primary responsibility of protecting its territory – a place to which pirates have yet to venture. Others may argue that the fact that pirates have not entered South African waters is credit to the capabilities of the navy.

On the balance of this information, how pragmatic is South Africa’s engagement in counter-piracy? Is it a worthy exercise in foreign policy, employing foresight, or does it constitute funds misspent on threat not immediately real to South Africa?

While Heitman makes apt observations with respect to the military budget, it is worth noting that South Africa’s security apparatus are most often deployed in assistance of other nations, often in Africa. South Africa does not fear any immediate threat to its territory, and is therefore able to make use of its defence forces as a tool in the furtherance of its foreign policy objectives, key amongst which is the precedence of Africa.

The fear of pirates’ southward migration offered Pretoria the opportunity to participate through its region in keeping with the country’s foreign policy and the practice of engaging the region as a first port of call. A SADC-based initiative would also be consistent with the African Agenda and the ideal of ensuring that the collective security of the Southern African neighbourhood is safeguarded. These considerations serve to motivate the pursuance of the issue in a way that befits South Africa’s model of foreign policy quite perfectly.

Counter-piracy activities have also allowed South Africa to push back at pirate frontiers farther away from home, effectively assisting neighbours through collaborative efforts, all the while, keeping the trouble at a safe distance from South Africa’s doorstep. This may be considered a pragmatic policy decision – indeed, South Africa is a littoral state with 3,751km of coast line, dotted along which sit a number of crucially important ports with significance not just for South African but for the region as a whole.

Given South Africa’s status as an emerging nation, it also has globalised interests, being impacted by costs brought on by piracy on the global economy, as well as the domestic concerns felt by neighbours. Furthermore, it acts to bolster South Africa’s perceived involvement in a fashionable issue of international proportions, without requiring all too much effort on the part of Pretoria. This too falls squarely in line with South Africa’s implied foreign policy objective of being the foremost African actor participating in the international space – the go-to partner on the continent who leads by example where issues of African security are concerned.

In conclusion, while the cost of South Africa’s counter-piracy engagement may, on the face of it, not appear to equal its benefit, South Africa has managed to structure this engagement in a way that plays to the global image that it works to portray, while expending relatively little resources. From a practical point of view the cost does not seem to meet the minimal realities of its risk, but perhaps in this instance South Africa has made its play on the basis of strategy rather than economics.

Is it necessary for its own security to be actively fighting the pirate threat? No, it is not. But, given the transnational nature of the crime, and nondiscriminatory nature of its effects, it is of crucial importance that states, littoral and landlocked become involved, acknowledge a shared responsibility and tackle the crime as a collective. Experts have long held that a coordinated effort by the international community is needed to turn the tide in the fight against piracy. This is South Africa’s effort to do just that – in this case a responsible global actor, but primarily one taking a path of pragmatic foreign policy.

 A version of this article was first published in the African Armed Forces Journal in November 2014 as a winning entry of the AAFJ Denel writing competition, and the full version may be accessed there.

 

 sa pirates

 

 

One-Day Courses: Maritime Business in China; Maritime Crime; Maritime Genealogy

Three Course Leaflet

Maritime Crime: Piracy, Smuggling, Wrecking and Watery Whodunnits (A one-day short course)

banner

The Greenwich Maritime Institute invites you to dive into a dark whirlpool of wrongdoing, past and present. Piracy, committed for private gain, is a form of maritime crime often in the headlines, but it is far from the only one. Led by Professor of Maritime Security Chris Bellamy, Dr Cathryn Pearce, author on wrecking, and Dr Helen Doe from Exeter University, an authority on smuggling, you will navigate through the depths of mankind’s misdeeds on the high seas, rivers and ashore.

The course will explore four main types of sea crime: piracy; wrecking; smuggling; and the wide variety of crimes committed aboard cruise ships, merchant ships and luxury yachts. Among the issues covered will be:

  • What is maritime crime?
  • Piracy then and now
  • Wrecking then and now
  • Smuggling then and now
  • Maritime murder

The course will take place on Wednesday 12th June 2012 from 9.30am – 4.30pm. The cost is £90 per person which includes lunch, refreshments, course materials and a certificate of attendance. A booking form can be found on the Greenwich Maritime Institute website: http://www2.gre.ac.uk/about/schools/gmi/study/short/programmes

Wreck image 250 pixels

Public Seminar – African Piracy: Is the Medicine Working?

The next GMI Seminar of the 2012-13 series will be taking place on Wednesday 7th November 2012 at 6pm in Room 075, Queen Anne Court. http://www2.gre.ac.uk/about/travel/greenwich

 

African Piracy:  Is the medicine working?

In this seminar, guest presenter Ian Millen  will address the current status and trends in both Somali and Gulf of Guinea maritime crime;  the different models, the approaches used to mitigate the risk and the possible future outcomes.  He will contrast the various types of crime practised either side of the African continent and look at how the risk is treated by regional and international actors.  His talk will focus on the operational aspects of Somali piracy and Gulf of Guinea maritime crime, outlining the complexity of tackling the problem from the perspective of a commercial intelligence company.

Cdr Ian Millen RN (retired) is the current Director of Intelligence at Dryad Maritime Intelligence Service Ltd – a market leading commercial intelligence company that helps seafarers quantify and mitigate the risks posed by piracy and other waterborne crime.  Ian has over 30 years’ of experience in the direction and conduct of national and multi-national intelligence operations.  From strategic analysis, supporting policy and capability development, to direct operational support Ian draws upon a significant amount of intelligence experience and regional knowledge.  After a 30 year career in the RN, Ian spent 4 years in the UK’s Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) where he was responsible for the development of information and intelligence systems.  The combined experience of maritime intelligence and organised criminality made him a natural choice to lead Dryad’s intelligence effort in support of its wide shipping client base.  Ian is a regular contributor to Lloyds List and other maritime publications.

Everyone is welcome to attend, the seminar will begin at 6pm, it is free to attend and no booking is required. Tea and coffee will be available from 5.30pm and a glass of wine afterwards.

http://www2.gre.ac.uk/about/schools/gmi/about/events/seminars

The GMI Seminar Series is sponsored by the Zhonghui Maritime Education Fund.

Combating Piracy – House of Commons 25 October 2012

‘Why are you here, Sir?’

‘Pirates’

‘Not that Johnny Depp, Sir?’

No – Somali pirates….’

The Met Police security at Portcullis House at 18.30 on Thursday was  rather better humoured (but probably far more effective)  than  most of the security screens you meet.  On Thursday Chris Bellamy attended a meeting chaired by Eric Joyce, MP, ex-British Army and now involved in a number of working parties dealing with piracy – the number one Maritime Security problem at the moment.  There were brief opening talks by journalist  Liz MacMahon from Lloyd’s List  who has written 220 articles on piracy in the past year, and Peter Cook, founder of the Security Association for the Maritime Industry (SAMI), who recently won Lloyd’s List‘s   ‘Newsmaker of the Year’ award.

 The good news was that pirate attacks – and, therefore, successful attacks, in the Indian Ocean and off the east coast of Africa were well down on last year. The not-so-good news was that the proportion  of attacks that were successful had risen, and also that piracy attacks  on the other side of Africa,  in the Gulf of Guinea, had increased.  The decline in attacks in the Indian Ocean could be attributed to successful Naval operations, but also to the longest Monsoon in at least ten years.  The Monsoon was now abating, so this welcome trend might not be irreversible…

Last October David Cameron announced that British-flagged ships would be allowed to carry armed guards.  Peter Cook had been widely quoted as saying that the minimum strength of an armed team – four – should not be reduced in attempts to cut costs.  However, there was another problem.  Although British-flagged ships could now carry armed teams, those teams were in danger of carrying illegal weapons.  Why?  Because the provenance of each weapon – as well as its serial number and other details – had to be squeaky clean.  Many weapons were held in floating armouries – on the High Seas, and therefore out of the jurisdiction of littoral states. This seemed an ideal solution.  But, having allowed British-flagged ships to carry armed teams, the British Government had not got as far as licensing or approving the principal floating armoury whence the weapons could be drawn.  This was at sea off Sri-Lanka, licensed by and operating with the full approval of the Sri  Lanka Government.  The ship itself was joint Mongolian- Sri-Lankan flagged.  In discussion, with several  shipping companies represented, it emerged that there were estimated to be 17-20 floating armouries around the Indian Ocean – mostly Mongolian flagged.  At the moment, however, a British security team drawing weapons from one of these floating armouries would be in breach of the law. If they got into a shooting match with pirates, this could cause a problem.

On the face of it, solving the problem the problem should be quite simple.  Approve the Sri-Lankan- Mongolian floating armoury, and maybe another one at the other (west)  end of the Ocean.  But the subject had so far elicited little interest from the relevant Ministers. Chris suggested that maybe a Parliamentary Question could unlock the problem.

 After  a lively discussion, which also included the problems of charging and trying pirates, the meeting adjourned to ‘the other part of the Palace’.  Portcullis House, built in the 1990s, is linked with the main Houses of Parliament by an underground passage.  The old and the new have been merged skilfully:  1990s tudor-gothic revival with the 1830s gothic revival and pugin.  You descend some stairs, pass between a stone lion and unicorn, and are very quickly passing below Big Ben and into the catacombs below the Palace of Westminster.  A good deal of ‘networking’, appropriately lubricated,  then followed.

Chris Bellamy

Successful Short Course in Maritime Piracy

The GMI held a very successful one-day course on Saturday 16th June 2012 at the Old Royal Naval College, Greenwich. It explored both a historical look at piracy, its development and the challenges faced by the maritime industry today. We were delighted to be able to draw on the knowledge from our very own Professor in Maritime Security, Chris Bellamy along with Dr Christian Bueger from Cardiff University, Peter Cook from SAMI and Neil Smith from Lloyds Market Association. This team delivered their seminar-style course to an impressive 18 delegates who were all presented with a certificate of attendance at the end of the day. We would like to thank everyone involved for making this day a success. Further details will now be posted about our next short course in July!