I would say most, if not all, are gangsters and criminals and the article is an attempt to weave together several separate but related issues into a compelling story. Yes, they are all related and may contribute to each other, but the underlying problem is that there is no government in Somalia. Pirating, battling warlords, illegal dumping, etc are all symptoms of that core problem.
“should” in the sense that if we want to stop piracy then we need to do the things I suggested. I wasn’t making a moral judgement - purely practical. The international community “should” help Somalia because that’s the best way of stopping piracy.
Although there are other arguments for stabilising Somalia:
-
failed states are dangerous for the international community (pure self-interest - they can become a haven for terrorists and criminals)
-
humanitarian reasons (there are many refugees pouring out of Somalia and it’s a shithole to live in)
but I was purely talking about the most effective way to permanently stop piracy so you can ignore any moral reasons for helping Somalia if you like.
Should, but easier said than done. We tried back in the 90s and it didn’t work out so well. And we’re still kind of busy trying to keep Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan from turning into failed nation-states.
Helping Somalia in the way you suggest would require a full-blown occupation and nation-building operation that would take a decade or more. While the international community as a whole has a very large interest in maintaining order, I’m not sure it’s their/our place to go around maintaining and re-establishing nation-states that were artificially created as a result of colonialism in the first place. NATO still has troops in Bosnia/Herzegovina and while they are certainly are at a much reduced number since their initial deployment, they don’t seem to have any plans to leave anytime soon.
As difficult as it is to deter or stop Somali pirates on the ocean alone, it would look downright appealing compared to the prospect of occupying another Muslim-majority country that contains various ethnic/clan groups.
Definitely easier said than done, I agree. But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done.
I don’t think it would require invasion and occupation - in fact that’s the last thing they need. It would just require support, UN and African sponsored negotiation between the different groups, lots of money - that kind of thing.
They’re already better and more stable than they were a few years ago. The current government isn’t very nice (too religious) but it’s better than no govenment. If they can be persuaded to share power with other (less insane) groups, we might be onto something.
If ethnicity, ideology, or religion can’t be used to unify a country, then the only thing you’ve really got left is the barrel of a gun. The current central government’s reach is only a few blocks within Mogadishu and absent installing an imam as prime minister, can’t really use religion as a unifier. Throwing money at the various warlords and clan leaders may buy their military allegiance or more likely - temporary armistice - but it can’t make them agree to permanently regard the current central government as the legitimate sovereign.
The wicked westerners were only responsible for the illegal fishing/dumping, not for the breakdown of civil society. However, both clearly took place.
“They” (like all loosely formed, heterogeneous groups of people) can have more then one thought, or idea, fuelling their actions. They are not robots and this is not a “Hardy Boys novel”. Clearly at least some pirates don’t consider “protecting their shore from fishers/dumpers” and piracy as mutually exclusive actions.
Clearly, both can be true.
I would agree with you, the underlying core problem is the lack of any strong or effective central government. All signs point to this.
Governments of India and Pakistan have encouraged fishing activities off Somalia, on many occassions, as have the Gulf States. Its a dog eat dog world.
Except that WE have not contributed to their situation. WE are not fishing in their waters, nor dumping waste there. They may, or may not, have so-called legitimate grievances, but the grievances are not legitimately against us.
WE in the sense of the Western world. The US has tremendous influence on what happens in the world, but the New York Times and the AP haven’t presented a single article about these facts. That’s what I’m supporting - the spread of facts, the increase of knowledge, the fighting of ignorance so that WE, the American people, can make informed decisions and policies. I can’t for the life of me see why this upsets you. You keep arguing against any acknowledgment of the facts as if learning these things was somehow bad or harmful? Again, no one here or in the article linked to has suggested giving in to the pirates. What is it you are opposing here?
Got any credible pictures?
That’s just it, there haven’t been any facts posted anywhere in this thread. The OP was a link to an opinion piece in a rather dubious website.
Vague “Europeans” and “Italian mafia” are allegedly dumping and fishing in Somalia’s waters. Based on this alone, as far as I can tell, you think that the US is somehow responsible? And that it justifies, or at least “explains” piracy against US ships? NO.
Did you read the BBC articles? It’s hard to deny what has happened. I never claimed the US is responsible, only that we have a responsibility to act with the greatest amount of knowledge available. You seem to be reacting emotionally to the suggestion that anything could “explain” piracy. Please note that having an explanation does not reduce anyone’s culpability.
Yes YOU have. America has a long history of meddling in Somalia’s affairs and overthrowing goverments it does not like. This is just disingenuous. We say they have no stable government but when one starts to emerge we overthrow it because we don’t like it.
Try the UN report that I citied, page 137 in the PDF.
With all due respect, cite please.
Please keep up with the news. Recently the USA supported with arms and money the overthrow of the Islamic Courts Union government of Somalia by warlords. On January 9, 2007, the United States openly intervened in Somalia by sending Lockheed AC-130 gunships to attack ICU positions in Ras Kamboni.
Bartholomew, one the greatest pirates, sailed south along the West cost of Africa. He went into a harbour and captured a number of slave ships, which he tried to ransom for gold. When one or more payers failed to pay, he burned the slave ships with all their content, i.e. with the slaves alive.
And the latest price of the Somali pirates included two fishing boats from Yemen and a cargo vessel from Lebanon. Yah for combatting Western imperialism.
Apologists for third-world thugs tend to have pretty darn selective memories, my friend.