Why did Britain put a hold on U.N. sanctions against pirates?
It’s no news that piracy is big business. But what might surprise you is that it’s not always just the bucaneers themselves who profit. In addition to the Somalis involved in the game, some Londoners have made a handy living off the scourge in recent years. How? Negotiating those ransoms. Turns out, it’s pretty lucrative ...
It's no news that piracy is big business. But what might surprise you is that it's not always just the bucaneers themselves who profit. In addition to the Somalis involved in the game, some Londoners have made a handy living off the scourge in recent years. How? Negotiating those ransoms. Turns out, it's pretty lucrative to be a middle man between pirate and shipping company.
Which is in part why Britain is holding up U.N. planned sanctions against several pirates. Of course, the motivation isn't just the money; the motivation is getting hijack victims freed --and as one man quoted in this Financial Times article puts it, "Nobody wants to pay ransoms. But when it’s the only option, what the hell else do you do?" Well, someone has to negotiate for the releases. And that's where London's finest contractors come in.
So yes, piracy is a nasty trade. This touches on a much bigger issue, however, and a question that the international community has struggled to answer in its fight on piracy. Do you pay ransoms and get the victims back safely (no one has been harmed after paying up), or do you take a moral stance and stop paying? The latter approach is what most countries facing a threat of terror do -- a great example is Colombia, where the leftist FARC rebels still hold hundreds hostage at the government's (and the society's) collective refusal to pay. But that's pretty hard to enforce in international waters, where no country is sovereign, no single society can come to consensus, and a lucrative industry has obviously sprung up.
It’s no news that piracy is big business. But what might surprise you is that it’s not always just the bucaneers themselves who profit. In addition to the Somalis involved in the game, some Londoners have made a handy living off the scourge in recent years. How? Negotiating those ransoms. Turns out, it’s pretty lucrative to be a middle man between pirate and shipping company.
Which is in part why Britain is holding up U.N. planned sanctions against several pirates. Of course, the motivation isn’t just the money; the motivation is getting hijack victims freed –and as one man quoted in this Financial Times article puts it, "Nobody wants to pay ransoms. But when it’s the only option, what the hell else do you do?" Well, someone has to negotiate for the releases. And that’s where London’s finest contractors come in.
So yes, piracy is a nasty trade. This touches on a much bigger issue, however, and a question that the international community has struggled to answer in its fight on piracy. Do you pay ransoms and get the victims back safely (no one has been harmed after paying up), or do you take a moral stance and stop paying? The latter approach is what most countries facing a threat of terror do — a great example is Colombia, where the leftist FARC rebels still hold hundreds hostage at the government’s (and the society’s) collective refusal to pay. But that’s pretty hard to enforce in international waters, where no country is sovereign, no single society can come to consensus, and a lucrative industry has obviously sprung up.
If you needed more evidence that there is no way to stop piracy under current international law, this is as good as it gets. It’s also one of the great ironies of these international times: We can all agree to send naval vessels to play cop off Somalia’s coast. But actually stopping the flow of money? Now that’s another story.
Elizabeth Dickinson is International Crisis Group’s senior analyst for Colombia.
More from Foreign Policy
Lessons for the Next War
Twelve experts weigh in on how to prevent, deter, and—if necessary—fight the next conflict.
It’s High Time to Prepare for Russia’s Collapse
Not planning for the possibility of disintegration betrays a dangerous lack of imagination.
Turkey Is Sending Cold War-Era Cluster Bombs to Ukraine
The artillery-fired cluster munitions could be lethal to Russian troops—and Ukrainian civilians.
Congrats, You’re a Member of Congress. Now Listen Up.
Some brief foreign-policy advice for the newest members of the U.S. legislature.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
