Friday, April 10, 2009 - 5:14 PM
The Guardian reports on a skirmish between French troops and a band of Somali pirates with a hijacked yacht -- one of 18 vessels currently seized, along with more than 250 hostages. The French ultimately recaptured the ship; sadly, one hostage died during the rescue.
The article says the yacht's sailors were repeatedly warned not to pass through the area.
French officials have privately expressed exasperation at the determination of the Tanit's crew...to persist with their expedition to east Africa despite the parlous security situation in the region.
The American captain of the Maersk Alabama remains a hostage in another flotilla, though the United States has sent in rapporteurs and helicopters.
It's a sorry, sorry state of affairs. And it suggests two things to me.
First, pirate exhaustion looms. (Though we've tested the limits on this blog, and found them boundlessly wide.) At one point, the pirates seemed a welcome distraction. Not so much any more -- people are dying, Somalia is a failed state. Second, as others have suggested, we should stop calling them pirates and start calling them something like "maritime terrorists," to end any remaining romanticization.
that they don't meet the definition of terrorists. Terrorism is "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological," and these guys are apparently in it just for the booty, aren't they? Like pirates? I mean, terrorists are like people who seek to disrupt the Republican National Convention and stuff.
Agreed that it's unfortunate that the word to describe the maritime equivalent of muggers conjures up images of Johnny Depp and the music of Gilbert and Sullivan.
How about "bandits"? Doesn't have as much stigma as "terrorist," but doesn't have the history of being willfully misapplied either. And it's accurate, too. As is "hijackers". The terms "maritime hijacking" and "seajacking" are sometimes applied, and don't sugarcoat the subject.
Sorry America, regardless how much you love Johnny Depp and those Disney movies these people are pirates. They have been a threat to some regions of the world for quite a while (like those in the South Pacific).
there may be more to the story -- there usually is.
"A Taste of AFRICOM: Somalia did find peace and tried to stop piracy until the US bombed the shit out of it in 2006"
http://www.chycho.com/?q=Somalia_Pirates_chycho2009
"we should stop calling them pirates and start calling them something like "maritime terrorists," to end any remaining romanticization. "
Why? Because pirates were a legal british invention? Because they attacked mostly evil spanish vessels on their way back from the looting of America?
The problem is that you are trying to see a romance where there's any. Pirates were never romantic.
Sorry, the awful truth is that they are pirates, exactly the same kind of pirate as Sir Francis Drake was.
"we should stop calling them pirates and start calling them something like "maritime terrorists," to end any remaining romanticization."
I agree, it is all about the rhetoric and framing of the issue. The term pirate in its modern context takes some romantic manifestation which leaves some wondering about their negative impact.
The pirates also seem to have a pretty good PR operation going as Reuters et al. often carry quotes from them which have been phone in via satellite phone.
Finally, until the costs outweigh the benefits of piracy it will continue. Simple.
Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.
Read More
(7)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE