Oil tankers plying the high seas are unlikely to benefit much from the recently passed UN Security Council resolution 1816 (200). Why not? As we suggested several weeks ago, other countries around the globe saw the resolution—sponsored by the US, France, Britain, and Panama—as opening the way to interventionist policies (OGJ, May 12, 2008, p. 36).
Under terms of the resolution, which was unanimously adopted on June 2, the Security Council decided that the states cooperating with Somalia’s transitional government would be allowed, for a period of 6 months, to enter the country’s territorial waters and use “all necessary means” to repress acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea in a manner consistent with relevant provisions of international law.
Somalia only...
The text was adopted with consent of Somalia, which lacks the capacity to interdict pirates or patrol and secure its territorial waters, following a surge in attacks on ships off the country’s coast. Keeping the intervention restricted to Somalia’s waters was key to passage of the resolution—a point underscored by several other nations whose waters might have become prey to unwelcome interventionist policies.
Speaking prior to action on the draft, Indonesia’s representative emphasized the need for the draft to be consistent with international law, particularly the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and to avoid creating a basis for customary international law for the repression of piracy and armed robbery at sea. Actions envisaged in the resolution should only apply to the territorial waters of Somalia, based upon that country’s prior consent.
Other nations had similar views. Speaking after the vote, Vietnam’s representative said the resolution should not be interpreted as allowing any actions in the maritime areas other than Somalia’s or under conditions contrary to international law and the Law of the Sea Convention.
Not Yemen or...
So there is no provision in this new resolution for countries to do anything about attacks elsewhere. So last week’s killing of one Nigerian naval officer and the wounding of four other people off Nigeria will just have to go unpunished—at least as far as this resolution is concerned. The same goes for attacks off Yemen, outside the Straits of Hormuz, and along the Straits of Malacca.
As for Somalia, which sees very few oil tankers anyway, the coast is still not clear.
Mohamud Sheikh Ibrahim Suley, spokesman for the Islamic Courts, said the UN resolution targeting Somali pirates had taken “the wrong” route. “This decision is backed by western nations whose agenda is to steal Somalia’s land and sea resources,” Suley said.
Sheikh Muqtar Robow, spokesman for Al-shabaab, a military rebel group, threatened to attack any foreign ships that transgress Somali territorial waters. “The UN, the United States, and Ethiopian troops are all one and the same to us, and we will fight them all,” Robow said.
