global studies - Jackson School of International Studies - University ...

Dealing with the Threats (and Promises) of Modern-Day Piracy continued
ship named after the Captain) was the vessel used to end the hostage
crisis with Somali pirates after the taking of captain of the Maersk
Alabama in April, 2009.
Are the Barbary Wars relevant to the issues we face in dealing with
piracy today? There are some important distinctions and some lessons
to be learned. The Barbary wars were against “states” with the ability
to conduct foreign policy and with official policies to take ships and
hold hostages. Modern pirates are for the most part criminal elements
organized only for personal gain, so diplomatic negotiation can seem
pointless. Although military means were primitive and communications
difficult in dealing with pirates in 1803, modern weapons and technology
have provided no clear solutions. But taking a firm and unified stand
against piracy, as well as the effective use of diplomacy, can lead to some
success in dealing with the problem.
In terms of use of force in dealing with piracy off the coast of Somalia,
there are no easy military solutions. There are relatively few naval
vessels in a vast ocean, and pirates are expanding their territory every
month. Coordination between the naval vessels is not always easy,
particularly with vessels from Russia and China that do not normally train
and communicate with each other. Some countries, such as Russia, are
reportedly very willing to use force, and most European countries more
reluctant.
International law clearly defines piracy as a crime (perhaps the oldest
international crime) and that deadly force can be used against pirates.
In this issue
1-2 Dealing with the Threats (and Promises) of
Modern-Day Piracy
3 Letter from the Director
4-5 2011 Task Force
5 Voices of Migration
6 Jackson School Journal of International Studies:
From Idea to Reality
6-12 News and Notes: Alumni, Student Awards,
2009-2010 Graduates
2 CENTER 2 FOR GLOBAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
But the application of force presents many challenges, and dealing
with captured and suspected pirates requires careful coordination. A
few pirates have been tried in U.S. court and U.S. law allows trials for
those taken in international waters. But the logistics of moving suspects,
protecting their rights, preserving evidence, and providing a secure place
of confinement is always difficult. Somalia has no functioning courts, and
Kenya has limited ability to handle cases that are delivered to its shore.
While many have advocated a purely military solution to Somali piracy,
force will not suppress the economic motivation behind it or resolve the
sense of desperation in the country. Ultimately, the problem of Somali
piracy is a failure of the international community to deal with non-viable
states. In the international system, every sovereign state is supposed
to be represented by a single legitimate government, which is allowed
to speak for its citizens. Even in places that fall short of the ideal, the
international community prefers to maintain the fiction of sovereignty
and recognize governments that exist only on paper, rather than to
acknowledge the need in failed states for an alternative model of political
order. Thus, when the Somali state failed, no entity stepped into the gap
to provide public services, defend the coastline, and chase away illegal
fishermen. Currently, states and organizations that have the resources
to help the country rebuild have limited interest in solving Somalia’s
long-term problems. This is partly because rebuilding failed states is
very difficult and unproven, and partly because other countries’ national
interests extend only to protecting their own companies and citizens who
are at risk of piracy in the Indian Ocean. While their economic interests
were not directly affected, western governments could safely ignore
Somalia’s problems (with the notable exception of the UN and American
humanitarian intervention of 1992-95). Now, it is a minor annoyance.
Somalia exemplifies the troubles that many African states faced
following the end of the Cold War. After achieving independence from
Italy in 1960, its new leaders tried out democracy, but the experiment
ended when the president was overthrown by the head of the military,
Mohammed Said Barre, a repressive autocrat. Barre first aligned with
the Soviet Union, but switched in 1980 to become a client of the U.S.
When the Cold War ended, the U.S. could no longer tolerate his human
rights violations, and decided to cut off support. Without a reliable flow
of revenues into the country, the regime collapsed and various armed
factions, sometimes organized around clan ties, began competing for
power. Since that time, Somalia has been unable to form a legitimate
government for an extended period of time, and militia leaders—
sometimes called warlords—have emerged to establish order on the local
or regional levels.
In this environment, making ends meet has been a constant struggle
for ordinary Somalis. The country has few natural resources, and much
of the meager economic base in the country was destroyed in decades
of fighting. Somalis have relied largely on fishing for their livelihood.
7 2011 Global Studies Fellows
Internship with Federal Relations
Kelly Voss, new Director of Career Services and
Alumni Relations
8 Living History: Global Storytelling Through Digital Media
9 Modern-Day Piracy continued
10-11 FLAS Fellowships
12 Calendar of Events
13-15 News and Notes: Faculty
15 Global Gallery
Continued on page 9