A recently signed memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Ethiopia and Somaliland to develop the Port of Berbera and establish a naval base has sparked tensions and fears of conflict with Somalia. The MoU grants Ethiopia commercial access to Somaliland ports and a 20-kilometer lease for a naval base in exchange for Ethiopia's recognition of Somaliland's independence, drawing strong criticism from Somalia, which considers Somaliland part of its territory.
The article, ‘Logistics, Politics and Berbera in the Eye of an International Storm’ examines how the pursuit of economic development through logistics infrastructure can exacerbate political tensions and reignite historical conflicts. The Berbera corridor, envisioned as a pathway to peace, stability, and prosperity through economic interdependence, now underscores the potential for violent conflict inherent in modern logistics and infrastructure development. The case furthermore brings out the complex interplay of local, regional, and international interests at play in the Horn of Africa. Thus, the port's upgrade, intended to attract foreign investment and transform the area into a major trade hub, has intensified competition among Somaliland's clan lineages, inflamed historical tensions between Somalia and Ethiopia, and challenged the security and logistic interests of regional and global powers in the Red Sea and Western Indian Ocean.
The article is part of a special issue of Politique Africaine about the current armed conflicts in the Horn of Africa.
Piracy has unfortunately become a health and safety risk for seafarers in the maritime industry today. However, little do we know about the impact of a pirate hijacking situation and how seafarers cope. Focusing on negotiation communication, the analysis debouches in a discussion of the dynamics of coping strategies, by investigating 173 authentic audio recordings of communication sequences recorded during a pirate hijacking situation that were donated voluntarily by a shipping company. The Captain assessed and reflected on the course of events in the situation, to which the negotiator responded appropriately, with acknowledging brief responses or psychological aid. This is similar to other highly dynamic decision-making settings, where decision-makers tend to continuously reflect and revise their view of the situation (Eraut 2000). The data is also consistent with the “reflection-in-action” concept by Schön (1983) used by van den Heuvel et al. (Cogn Technol Work 16: 25–45, 2014) in their investigation of communication of police officers in hostage situations. However, the coping dynamics changed when the negotiator’s responses became too minimal. This shows how the context and the individual’s cognitive appraisal of the encounter co-shapes the coping dynamics in the situation. It is urged that pre-piracy care and seafarer training involves practical examples and information about roles and coping dynamics in negotiation communication as part of an orchestrated approach to the scourge of piracy.
Maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea is a challenge that straddles multiple players and sectors, and crimes like piracy cause disruptions to international trade and shipping. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the global shipping industry tried to keep maritime security on the agenda, while advocating for global security assemblages, specifically, transnational policing initiatives as part of the maritime security governance. Using the notion of narratives and assemblage thinking, it is argued that although global shipping and Ghanaian state agents agree on the problem, they differ on which maritime security governance infrastructure to deploy, resulting in tensions between the two parties.
Maritime security is a major international concern with the Gulf of Guinea recognised as one of the global hotspots of blue crime, such as piracy, kidnap for ransom, trafficking of narcotics, human and arms, and illegal fishing. The complex and complicated challenge of maritime security, a wicked problem, calls for inter-agency coordination, synergy of efforts and scaling up of responses. Given the complexity of maritime security threats, no single organisation has the institutional muscle to single-handedly deal with it. Drawing on evidence from Ghana, where the arrival of maritime security as a concept triggered a shift from single to a multi-agency approach to dealing with maritime issues, the article examines the potential of and challenges associated with inter-agency coordination. In line with recent international developments, African nations like Ghana aim to apply the concept of inter-agency coordination to tackle maritime insecurity in its waters. The paper assesses how inter-agency coordination could be used in an African maritime security governance context, while examining power imbalance, strife for agency autonomy and other obstacles that have to be addressed to ensure that the promises associated with the concept are fulfilled.
How, as a sub-set of maritime security, can piracy studies contribute with conceptual insights of relevance to the field of international security governance and international politics more broadly? To answer this question the article examines, with reference to critical intervention studies, how responses to Somali piracy have had constitutive effects, notably ‘back onto’ the intervening actors themselves. More specifically, three themes are examined: regulation (law), structures (institutions) and practices (actors), each of which highlights a distinct sense of contingency, which both characterizes contemporary security governance at sea and makes ‘the maritime’ an interesting domain for the study of constitutive effects related to the making of intervention actors. In light of this, the article argues that studying ‘the maritime’ can offer conceptual insights to the constitutive effects of counter-piracy interventions that may prove relevant to broader debates about governance and security in a changing world order.
Taking seriously debates in IR about the significance of materiality and noticing the prominence of materiality in contemporary counterpiracy interventions, this article combines insights from Science and Technology Studies (STS) with insights from the poststructuralist intervention literature. Both literatures highlight the importance of “constitutive effects.” Poststructuralists do so with attention to the effects of intervention in constituting, temporarily, the meaning of sovereignty, and STS scholars do so with attention to constitutive effects that processes at the level of materiality give rise to. By combining these two literatures, this article asks: how might we think about the constitutive effects of material aspects of counterpiracy interventions? This question is explored through a focus on two donor-funded pirate prisons in Somalia. By operationalizing the STS notions of coproduction (Jasanoff 2004c) and solution/problem-framings (Beck et al. 2016), the article broadens the study of how intervention practices give rise to constitutive effects by explicitly attending to processes at the level of materiality. This approach enables the article to highlight an important tension in contemporary intervention practices: a tension between donor's desire to delimit intervention contributions and the risk that such contributions (including presumably more easily delineated material aspects) give rise to effects that challenge this faith in neatly delimited forms of intervention. This tension is not only relevant in relation to Somali counterpiracy, but also in other intervention contexts. The article thus illustrates how STS insights can help advance our appreciation of the manifold dimensions and effects of contemporary interventionism.
It is widely acknowledged that maritime security in the Gulf of Guinea is a highly complex phenomenon involving a variety of issues (legal deficiencies, inadequate military equipment, and challenges like corruption, political unrest and youth unemployment) as well as a multiplicity of external responders. To make sense of the impact that external actors have when they address this complex problem through various maritime capacity building endeavours, this article argues that there is a need to understand the attractiveness of capacity building vis-à-vis the widely acknowledged need for a comprehensive approach, as well as the difficulties of translating the potential for comprehensiveness into practice (as important aspects of the problem remain largely unaddressed). Further, it is argued that it is important to appreciate that even if these gaps – i.e. the aspects that maritime capacity building currently leaves unaddressed – represent a ‘failure’ to deliver a comprehensive response, they are at the same time illustrative of how the maritime capacity building activities of various external actors also ‘succeed’ in having an impact on this regional security landscape – for instance, by influencing how certain aspects of this multifaceted problem are prioritised, whilst others are only marginally addressed, if at all.
Illicit maritime activities generate significant scholarly and policy attention. While diverse in nature, governance responses share many regulatory features. This introduction advances the notion of maritime justice, a socio‐legal research agenda. Different from broader maritime security studies, it places law at the centre of the inquiry, studying maritime governance practices through the lens of regulation. Empirically, it covers operational, spatial, and structural junctions between illicit maritime activity and regulatory responses deriving from international and domestic law. Analytically, it is heterogeneous but holds a methodological commitment to studying everyday law enforcement practices of maritime security governance to disentangle its meanings and effects. The introduction posits the junction between illicit maritime activities and regulatory responses as a productive space to study the varied norms that shape order‐making at sea, and vice versa.
In a new book, senior researcher Jessica Larsen analyses how relevant anti-piracy legislation was enforced when international ship contributions and regional coastal states cooperated on anti-piracy off the coast of Somalia in 2008-2016.
The book is a socio-legal study based on both clause analyses and ethnographic fieldwork. The book takes the reader on board a warship patrolling the Indian Ocean and into the courtrooms of the island nation of Seychelles, which conducted 17 piracy cases. Through interviews and observations, the book uncovers how anti-piracy legislation works in practice. Existing studies have primarily examined existing law. This book goes out into the field to also uncover applied law.
The analysis shows examples of ambiguity about which legal sources should be applied at sea. It identifies practices in court that show cases of impunity and questions legal certainty. The implications of this should be considered as counter-piracy off Somalia has been used as a model for counter-piracy elsewhere, such as in the Gulf of Guinea.
The Gulf of Guinea (GoG) region is a vast maritime area off West and Central Africa, and an area of interest to numerous external actors for a range of different reasons including historical relations, trade, oil and fishery. This maritime space is characterised not only by legitimate actors’ presence at sea but also by various types of maritime criminality, with piracy currently being high on the agenda of external actors. Indeed, in 2020, 95% of all maritime kidnappings globally happened in the GoG. Through the application of a specific theoretical lens, namely the politics of piracy numbers, this chapter offers a regional case study of piracy in the GoG. Through this lens, the chapter for example explores how, though being the most counted type of maritime insecurity, piracy is only one aspect of a much broader complex of maritime insecurities. Attending also to the politics of missing numbers, the chapter also explores how far less attention is devoted to counting various onshore dimension of GoG-piracy.