How Pirates Are Portrayed Throughout History History Essay

How Pirates Are Portrayed Throughout History History Essay

Plagiarists have plagued mariners for centuries and their presence has been reported in the close entirety of the seas covering our planet. Southeast Asia, a nautical part basically composed of 1000s of islands, faced a rush of plagiarist onslaughts from the late 1990s to the early 2000s and was, until 2007, the most pirate-infested Waterss in the universe. Today, the regional state of affairs has extremely improved and Southeast Asia is no longer ranked figure one in footings of plagiarist onslaughts.

This concluding thesis consists of an debut and a interlingual rendition. The debut is divided into four subdivisions and purposes at analysing the development of buccaneering in Southeast Asia, and more peculiarly in the Malacca Straits.

The first subdivision briefly relates the history of buccaneering, describes the sort of onslaughts ruling in Southeast Asia and approaches the legal facet of buccaneering.

The 2nd subdivision is dedicated to buccaneering in Southeast Asia. It presents the causative factors that made buccaneering flourish in the 1990s until it reached its extremums in the early 2000s. Then the job became so endangering for international and national economic systems that Southeast Asian provinces, foremost strongly loath to collaborate and steadfastly determined to protect their sovereignties, have eventually had no other pick but to work together to undertake this load. From 2004, they have adopted a series of national, bilateral and many-sided steps. The description of the different enterprises together with their defects is followed by the results of these attempts.

The 3rd subdivision focuses, though shortly, on Somalia, where Acts of the Apostless of buccaneering and highjackings have late hit the international headlines. In the last few old ages, the figure of onslaughts in the Gulf of Aden and off Somalia has rapidly increased, which resulted in the part going the most piracy-prone country in the universe. The causative factors that pushed people to travel on sea and attempt to do a life are enumerated, so as some of the international enterprises taken in an effort to procure these Waterss.

The 4th subdivision suggests a concise comparing between buccaneering in Southeast Asia and Somalia and draws the decision.

The debut of this concluding thesis is followed by a interlingual rendition nearing specific menaces posed by buccaneering but frequently ignored in the media. For case, when turn toing the job of buccaneering, the media frequently report ship highjackings, crew members being taken surety, national and/or international reactions and the figure of onslaughts. However, when plagiarists assault a vas, it is far more than sailors ‘s lives which are threatened. This is precisely the message that John S. Burnett tried to set across in his book entitled Dangerous Waters: Modern Piracy and Terror on the High Seas. Burnett worked as a newsman for United Press International ; he is a former legislative helper to members of Congress in Washington, D.C. ; he wrote articles and other paperss for several publications, including The Guardian ( UK ) , New York Times and National Geographic ; he produced documental movies ; and he wrote several books. Burnett went to sea when he was 17. Then he worked as a merchandiser mariner, became the captain of a fishing boat in Alaska, worked on oil rigs, etc. ( BURNETT 2007 ) .

Burnett did n’t see buccaneering as a serious menace until he was attacked in 1992, while sailing across the South China Sea. Having no valuables aboard his sloop, pirates left rapidly. Then, he decided to transport a personal probe on buccaneering and sailed on assorted oilers in Southeast Asia. In August 2001, he joined the Montrose, a VLCC ( Very Large Crude Carrier ) “ built to transport oil from the Middle East oil Fieldss to refineries in North America, Europe and Asia – on a transition that would do him through the Malacca Straits. ” ( BURNETT 2002: p.12 ) He besides joined the Petro Concord, “ a smaller oiler that delivers merchandises refined from Middle East cruse oil to Ho Chi Minh City. ” ( BURNETT 2002: p.12 ) . Throughout the ocean trips, he collected histories from shipmasters, mariners and other people traversing those unsafe Waterss every twenty-four hours and gathered them in a book.

Dangerous Waters: Modern Piracy and Terror on the High Seas describes assorted onslaughts, nowadayss anecdotes and attacks facets of buccaneering that do non ever spring to mind but which effects could be dramatic. When I read the book for the first clip, two specific chapters caught my attending and touched my, and that is why I chose to interpret them as portion of this concluding thesis.

The first chapter tells the narrative of a hit between a container vas and a petroleum bearer. Burnett explains that the accident occurred because one ( or possibly both ) ships, boarded by plagiarists, was steaming out of control through the Malacca Straits. By describing this hit, Burnett underlines the environmental catastrophe that a pirate onslaught can arouse. If a oiler was involved in such a hit in crowed seas, such as the Malacca or Singapore Straits, an ecological and economic catastrophe will about necessarily occur. The maritime paths would likely be closed, which would in bend disrupt the whole of international trade. Oil would distribute on seashores, killing local resources and doing the life of local population still harder.

The 2nd chapter I chose to interpret focal points, on the one manus, on sources ( of import amounts of money are frequently offered to sources in exchange of information that would take to the recovery of a hijacked ship ) and, on the other manus, on the usage of phantom ships ( frequently used in people or drug-smuggling, operations which have frequently ended up severely ) . In this chapter, Burnett underlines the extent to which plagiarists and organized offense are sometimes connected.

As portion of this concluding thesis, I preferred to compose the debut with the American spelling to maintain in harmoniousness with Burnett ‘s book. In the interlingual rendition, the reader will detect two sorts of notes: the transcriber ‘s footers and the writer ‘s endnotes. The transcriber ‘s footers are at the underside of the page and numbered from 1. The writer ‘s endnotes are presented the same manner than in the book: they are gathered at the terminal of the full interlingual rendition and have the same Numberss. To do a differentiation between footers and endnotes, the endnotes Numberss are written in italic, bold and underlined ( illustration: 24 ) .

Introduction

History, nature of onslaughts and legal facets

Piracy is one of the oldest professions in the universe. Incidents experienced by ancient Greek and Roman mariners were already recounted in the Hagiographas of Homer and Cicero ( ALTMAN 2008 ) . While the Middle Ages saw Vikings blighting Western Europeans, the 16th and 17th centuries, a period matching to the colonial epoch, witnessed the commissioning of privateers to torture the Spanish fleet doing the conquering of Latin America ( ALTMAN 2008 ) . However, it is between 1620 and 1720 that piracy truly flourished, a period referred to as “ the aureate age of buccaneering ” ( ROYAL NAVAL MUSEUM 2002 ) and during which plagiarist raided ships for gold and Ag ( ALTMAN 2008 ) . World ‘s Waterss will be extremely infested with plagiarists until the nineteenth century, when Great Britain became a planetary maritime power. In order to protect its planetary involvements, an of import British fleet was deployed through the seas ( MORETO 2010 ) , and accordingly buccaneering declined. A combination of factors linked to the development of the steam engine made buccaneering go a fringy activity by the twentieth century. Indeed, as Moreto ( 2010 ) explains, “ ships became bigger and faster ( more hard to board ) , most of the commercial pilotage took topographic point in the high seas ( more hard to descry and stop ) and the carried lading shifted to bulk or interrupt majority, which could no longer be easy hauled away. ” However, buccaneering flourished once more in the 2nd half of the twentieth century, when the growing of universe ‘s trade forced vass to go through through narrow infinites ( the Malacca Straits for case ) , which facilitated the interception of ships ( MORETO 2010 ) .

Modern buccaneering is non truly different than the sort of buccaneering that has existed for millenary. Plagiarists are still looking for hoarded wealths and for ship ‘s safes. The nature of the hoarded wealth, nevertheless, has changed. When they assault a vas, it is non silver or gold they are after, but money or “ anything of value that can be sold readily and turned into money ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.23 ) , such as telecastings, jewelry, ship ‘s equipment ( wirelesss ) , etc. Sometimes, pirates even take control of a vas and unload its lading onto another ship. Then, the hijacked ship is abandoned, sold or used for people/drug/arms-smuggling. In that instance, we enter in the maritime fraud sphere and the ship is called a “ phantom ship. ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.23-24 ) What has non changed than earlier is the force and inhuman treatment of the plagiarists. Assaulted crews are frequently beaten and threatened with decease. Many of them are thrown overboard. Others are abandoned on a raft life. In Southeast Asia, different types of buccaneering were reported as “ the robbery of vass at sea, the highjacking of vass and kidnap-for ransom onslaughts ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) but the great bulk of onslaughts are robbery ( HOFFMANN 2009 ) .

From a legal point of position, what is buccaneering precisely? Piracy has been defined under international jurisprudence ( in Article 101 from the 1982 United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea, or UNCLOS, and in Article 3 from the 1988 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, or SUA ) but their restrictive nature bounds their effectivity ( for illustration, harmonizing to UNCLOS, buccaneering merely exists on the high seas, i.e. on international Waterss, where no legal powers prevailed ; and SUA does non see armed robbery as buccaneering ) .[ 1 ]Another broader definition is the 1 of the IMB ( International Maritime Bureau, a specialised agency within the International Chamber of Commerce ) , which qualifies buccaneering as: “ An act of embarkation ( or attempted embarkation ) with the purpose to perpetrate larceny or any other offense and with the purpose or capableness to utilize force in promotion of that act. ” ( Young 2007: p.10 ) This definition is used for statistics by the IMO ( International Maritime Organization ) and the IMB ( DE COCK 2009 ) . It is besides the definition by and large find in the security literature and in the media ( Young 2007: p.4 ) . As portion of this work, given that most of the certification used comes from these sorts of beginnings, buccaneering will be referred to as the IMB definition.

Southeast Asia has been infested with plagiarists for centuries. But their presence has been peculiarly highlighted since the creative activity of the IMB ‘s Piracy Reporting Center in Kuala Lumpur in 1992. This organic structure gathers informations on plagiarist onslaughts happening everyplace in the universe and published weelkly, quarterly and one-year studies. Though an increasing phenomenom, the international community did non pay attending to buccaneering until the 9/11 terrorist onslaughts. It was so realized that “ the easiness with which pirates carry out onslaughts in the passs could be translated into a terrorist group making the same, with much graving tool effects. ” ( VAVRO 2008 ) The consciousness of how insure the maritime sphere was prompted the international community to strongly encrourage provinces involved with buccaneering to take steps to turn to the job.

This prompted However, one key event the international community at the bend of the millenary, their presence has In 1992, , where the figure of onslaughts reached its extremums. This waterway, “ which shrink to 1 300 metres at the narrowest point ” ( FRECON 2008 ) , connects the Indian Ocean ( via the Andaman Sea ) and the Pacific Ocean ( via the South China Sea ) , and boundary lines Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. During the 18th and 19th centuries, it has become an of import waterway for planetary commercialism. Today, approximately 40 % of the universe ‘s trade passes through this channel.

Beginnings of the revival of buccaneering

Piracy in Southeast Asia surged from the late 1990s to the early 2000s as the consequence of a series of interrelated factors. Actually, Acts of the Apostless of buccaneering have begun to re-emerge massively in the part since the sixtiess, when the procedures of globalisation have encouraged economic development. The job is that Asiatic weak provinces were non able to command the spread outing economic systems and to apportion the net incomes reasonably, which resulted in many “ groups of maritime-oriented peoples ” ( Young 2007: p.57 ) being isolated and deprived from any economic betterment. On the contrary, their life conditions worsened and the poorness rate rose. However, with globalisation, universe ‘s trade increased significantly every bit good as sea traffic, particularly in these critical transportation lanes. The vass sailing through these Waterss became attractive marks for the hapless coastal populations and, as Young explains ( 2007: p.60 ) , “ the possibility of conveying place the equivalent of a twelvemonth ‘s income, or more, in one foray must turn out an resistless enticement to some. ” This is the really first ground that pushed many people to come back on the seas and seek to do a life.

The incapacity of the provinces to pull off the globalisation effects demonstrates that weak political control and hapless administration generate hapless socio-economic conditions. Actually, authoritiess of this part have frequently met troubles in pull offing the state of affairs on land and sea countries have increasingly become unbridled infinites, leting felons to run with impunity. Besides, weak political control has besides contributed to corruptness, another ground to the revival of buccaneering. Numerous police officers and armed forces ‘ members have committed plagiarist onslaughts and corrupt port functionaries do non waver to pass on information about ladings for illustration, leting plagiarists to make up one’s mind in progress which vass they are traveling to assail ( STOREY 2008: p.107 ) .

Another factor holding greatly exacerbated the job of buccaneering is the 1997 Asiatic fiscal crisis, ensuing in terrible rising prices. Harmonizing to Storey ( 2008: p.107-108 ) , “ unemployment rose from 4.7 % in 1997 to 21 % in 1998, while poorness increased from 11 % to 40 % over the same period. ” Coastal populations and particularly fishermen, holding boats and maritime accomplishments, had no pick but to prosecute in buccaneering and armed robbery to supplement their incomes. The economic prostration has besides affected the delicate political stableness, which “ let attending to be diverted ” ( KAUR KANG 2009 ) , “ doing it easier for people to prosecute illegal methods of income coevals. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) The crisis forced authoritiess to cut their disbursement. Inevitably, defence disbursement was besides reduced. Yet, guaranting security at sea is expensive and required “ boats and aircraft well-equipped with radio detection and ranging, communications and, above all, trained and honest crews, shore-based bid and coordination installations, dependable information about ship motions and ladings [ aˆ¦ ] ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.31-32 ) . It was impossible for littoral provinces to afford it, which left the plagiarists the needed freedom to run. There were besides cuts in wages, which pushed some active military forces to “ prosecute in illegal activities to supplement their incomes. ” ( STOREY 2008: p.107 )

The geographical state of affairs of Southeast Asia has besides contributed to the revival of buccaneering. Young ( 2007: p.70 ) suggests an interesting description of the part: “ the geographics is awfully complex, characterized by extended coastlines, labyrinths of littoral Rhizophora mangle and lowland imps cut by riverine estuaries, spotted with sand Bankss and switching waterways, and 1000s of islands surrounded by countless reefs. ” These conditions “ makes effectual sea patrol a daunting, if non impossible, undertaking ” ( KOO 2004 ) and supply ample hideouts for plagiarists.

The last account to the revival of buccaneering is the presence in the part of three of import terrorist organisations: the Abu Sayyaf Group, in the Philippines, wants the constitution of an Islamic province in Mindanao ( BBC News 2000 ) ; the Free Aceh Movement ( Gerakan Aceh Merdeka, GAM ) , in Sumatra, wants the state ‘s independency ; and the Jemaah Islamiyah, a “ hawkish Islamist group active in several Southeast Asiatic states, wants to set up a pan-Islamic province across much of the part. ” ( CFR.org 2009 ) The three groups are involved in many plagiarist onslaughts as portion of their political battle. They are said to transport pirate onslaughts in order to finance their organisations ( to purchase weaponries for illustration ) .

Unilateral, bilateral and many-sided anti-piracy enterprises

In the 1990s, when Acts of the Apostless of buccaneering reappeared to a great extent in the Malacca Strait, the littoral provinces took early bilateral understandings to counter the job. Coordinated naval patrols were organized between Indonesia and Singapore, Indonesia and Malaysia, and the Philippines and Malaysia ( STOREY 2008: p.112 ) . Under these agreements, each state, while policing its several Waterss, was in direct communicating with the other provinces ‘ naval forcess. However, that bilateral coordination was ill implemented and communications were limited to exchange of agendas ( MURPHY 2009: p.85 ) . The undertaking was abandoned during the fiscal prostration ( STOREY 2008: p.112 ) .

In the 2000s, pirated onslaughts surged in the Malacca Strait. But until late, the littoral provinces, i.e. Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore, were strongly loath to work together. While Singapore was more prone to cooperation in order to battle buccaneering,[ 2 ]Malaysia and Indonesia considered the issue “ as a domestic job to be addressed internally by each province. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) They perfectly wanted to keep the sovereignty of their territorial Waterss and prevent any other province from step ining in their legal powers. As a affair of fact, territorial boundaries are a sensitive issue for these provinces because of “ viing claims over seaward resources, bequests of colonial domination, and general concerns over external power purposes in the part. ” ( VAVRO 2008 ) Besides, their military forces were distrustful of each other and information on plagiarists activities were rarely shared between national authoritiess ( SHUMAN 2009 ) . As a effect, provinces took strictly national steps and merely conducted anti-piracy patrols on their territorial Waterss. “ This means that a patrol pursuit must stop one time plagiarists are outside the territorial legal power of the patrolling province, therefore leting plagiarists to assail in one province ‘s district and so withdraw to another province ‘s district for safety. ” ( VAVRO 2009 ) In other words, plagiarists were ne’er arrested.

Another job forestalling cooperation was linked to the 1997 crisis. The provinces had to confront more pressing internal issues. To settle the job of buccaneering was non a precedence. Equally far as Indonesia is concerned, it was besides “ loath to turn to the job of buccaneering because merely 25-30 per centum of the military outgo was covered by the military budget following the fiscal crises, with the staying financess believed to be coming from illegal activities, such as buccaneering. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 )

However, the job of buccaneering became so terrible that the international community threatened to “ step in in the passs if the local authoritiess did n’t work out the job themselves. ” ( SCHUMAN 2009 ) Different external suggestions resulted in Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore eventually make up one’s minding to collaborate and “ to take national and regional enterprises to undertake the job of buccaneering. ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.83 ) One of these suggestions was the Regional Maritime Security Initiative, or RMSI, initiated by the United States in 2004 to undertake nautical terrorist act, but besides buccaneering. Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore ne’er endorsed the enterprise, but fearing that the U.S. would acquire deeper involved in their domestic personal businesss, they “ have taken the initial stairss towards security co-operation. ” ( Young 2007: p.84 ) Besides, in June 2005, the Joint War Committee of Lloyd ‘s, the London-based insurance giant, “ designate parts of the Malacca Straits to be countries of ‘Perceived Enhanced Risk ‘ ” , which put ( or threatened to set ) an economic cost on Southeast Asia buccaneering. ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.83 ) In other words, it means that the country presents the same jeopardies as traveling in a war zone and, accordingly, higher insurance premiums were imposed for vass pass throughing through the passs. Harmonizing to Pottengal Mukundan, Director of the IMB, “ this war zone categorization had a enormous impact among the littoral states of the Straits, Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia. [ aˆ¦ ] They saw that the state of affairs had to be brought under control. ” ( WHALEY 2009 )

In 2004, the three littoral provinces signed the Malaysia-Singapore-Indonesia ( MALSINDO ) trilateral patrol understanding, “ the first significantly operationalized many-sided cooperation in Southeast Asia to develop without an extraregional spouse. ” ( BRADFORD 2005: p.68 ) Under this understanding, the naval forcess of Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore organized coordinated sea patrols during which each province guards its several territorial Waterss, but they portion information on possible plagiarist activity. Although the patrols proved to be more effectual, the frequence of plagiarist onslaughts has non instantly decreased ( RAYMOND 2009 ) . Actually, MALSINDO presents several failings. First, the take parting states “ have non given the right of ‘hot chase ‘[ 3 ]into another provinces ‘ territorial Waterss ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.87 ) , a impression they would still see “ as an violation of their sovereignty. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) Second, even though a lower limit of 24 ships are required for the MALSINDO patrols, no more than 17 are now allocated to it. Third, they are chiefly manned by junior crews ( MURPHY 2009: p.87 ) .

However, this first cooperation had an of import impact on buccaneering because “ the plagiarists could no longer leap from one state ‘s legal power, go forthing a pursuing naval vas behind. Now, the naval forces of the following legal power was expecting. ” ( WHALEY 2009 )

In 2005, the littoral provinces adopted the “ Eyes of the Sky ” ( EiS ) program, which supplemented sea patrols by joint air patrols “ to reconnoiter the passs for plagiarists. ” ( SCHUMAN 2009 ) As portion of this program, each take parting provinces provided two aircrafts for the patrols. These planes were allowed to “ wing for up to three maritime stat mis ( 5 kilometer ) into the twelve-nautical-mile ( 22 kilometer ) territorial Waterss of the take parting provinces. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) Besides, the squad of each flight was composed of “ one officer from each state, ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.86 ) which has greatly facilitated the sharing of information. “ The on-board squad advises of any leery contacts and the state in whose Waterss the incident has been observed can trip a patrol. ” ( MURPHY 2009: p.86 ) The EiS program, as MALSINDO, presents some failings. The first 1 is that merely eight sallies are flown per hebdomad whereas 70 sallies are needed to “ supervise the passs efficaciously, 24/7. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) Furthermore, patrols are non flown at dark because the crews do non hold the appropriate night-vision equipment ( STOREY 2008: p. 119 ) . Yet, the bulk of onslaughts take topographic point between one and six o’clock a.m. ( RAYMOND, 2009 ) . Finally, the effectivity of this aerial surveillance raises the undermentioned uncertainty: how could the on-board squad find the intent amongst the 100s of little boats sailing the Straits and place “ leery activity? ” ( STOREY 2008: p.119 )

Despite the insufficiencies inherent to the EiS, the program was an of import measure frontward from a political point of position. It was so the first clip the three take parting states accepted to “ set aside concerns over the sovereignty of their territorial Waterss and let foreign forces across the boundary line. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) The status to this via media was to hold one representative from each province aboard.

In 2006, the three littoral provinces signed another understanding conveying both MALSINDO and EiS under the Malacca Straits Patrols, through which the exchange of information would be faster.

Besides many-sided steps, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia have taken one-sided enterprises since 2004. The authorities of Singapore has invested in its maritime constabulary and naval forces ( MURPHY 2009: p.84 ) to beef up security in the ports and territorial Waterss of the state ( STOREY 2008: p.112 ) . Important ladings are escorted. Singapore ‘s governments have implemented an “ incorporate surveillance and information web for tracking leery maritime motions ” and, in order to avoid merchandiser vass and smaller boats to meet, it has retraced transporting lanes. In 2005, Malaysia formed a national seashore guard, called the Malayan Maritime Enforcement Agency, and assemblage, amongst others, the Marine Police, Customs and Immigration sections ( MURPHY 2009: p.85 ) . It has besides placed armed police officers on ships conveying unsafe merchandises and sailing through Malaysian waterways ( STOREY 2008: p.117 ) . Finally, Indonesia has added naval patrols in its Waterss ( STOREY 2008: p. 117 ) and established two new naval and control centres ( MURPHY 2009: p.85 ) .

In Indonesia, another event is said to hold influenced the diminution of buccaneering. It was believed that a bulk of the plagiarists blighting the Malacca Straits were coming from Aceh, on the northern tip of Sumatra, a state that had been the theater of a major struggle between the GAM ( Free Aceh Movement ) , an Islamic separationist group, and the Indonesia governments for three decennary. In an attempt to stamp down the GAM, Indonesian military personnels and police officers had been based in the part, “ insulating Aceh and eliminating economic chances, ” ( SCHUMAN 2009 ) and coercing Acehnese to travel on the seas to gain a life. The state of affairs has changed after the 2004 lay waste toing tsunami which hit most of the part. In the aftermath of this catastrophe, both parties have had no pick but to sit down at the dialogue tabular array and discuss on solutions to mend the amendss. As a consequence, they eventually signed the Aceh Peace Agreement in 2005. More than half of the Indonesia military forces were withdrawn from the Aceh district and, in return, the GAM “ agreed to decommission its arms and fade out its armed wing. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) Analysts believed that this development on land mostly improved the state of affairs on the seas.

The Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia ( ReCAAP ) is one of the latest steps implemented in Southeast Asia to battle buccaneering. ReCAAP, which entered into force in 2006 and gathers all members of ASEAN member provinces[ 4 ]and Japan, China, Korea, India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, is the first inaugural “ to be implemented on a government-to-government degree. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) As portion of ReCAAP, an Information Sharing Center ( ISC ) has been established in Singapore. A point of contact has been affected to each ReCAAP member. So, the signers send incident studies to their “ focal points ” ( RAYMOND 2009 ) , which will, in bend, convey them to the ISC ( MURPHY 2009: p.66 ) . This program permits easier exchanges of information between ReCAAP member provinces and ease the authorship of studies on regional plagiarist onslaughts. However, ReCAAP presents a major failing: neither Malaysia nor Indonesia have ratified it. It is hard to conceive of ReCAAP effectivity without these states given that they have both strategic places along the Malacca Strait and that they are two of the “ most pirate-prone states in the universe. ” ( RAYMOND 2009 )

Results

Number of existent and attempted onslaughts:

States

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010 ( January-March )

Dutch east indies

119

91

103

121

94

79

50

43

28

15

8

Malacca Straits

75

17

16

28

38

12

11

7

2

2

0

Malaya

21

19

14

5

9

3

10

9

10

16

4

Union of burma

5

3

/

/

1

/

/

/

1

1

/

Philippines

9

8

10

12

4

/

6

6

7

1

1

Singapore Passs

5

7

5

2

8

7

5

3

6

9

0

Siam

8

8

5

2

4

1

1

2

/

1

0

Sum

242

153

153

170

158

102

83

70

54

45

13

Beginning: ICC IMB 2004, 2009 and 2010.

Over the six past old ages, Southeast Asiatic authoritiess have successfully adopted a figure of one-sided, bilateral, many-sided and regional steps to battle buccaneering in their Waterss. Equally shortly as 2006, the figure of onslaught began to diminish, which convinced the Joint War Committee the take the Malacca Straits its statue of “ war hazard country. ” ( STOREY 2008: p. 101 ) The state of affairs has improved in the whole part, where 45 onslaughts occurred in 2009 compared with 170 in 2003. Equally far as the Malacca Straits, merely two onslaughts were reported in 2009 alternatively of 38 in 2004.

These figures, though encouraging, must be carefully considered for several grounds. First of wholly, the tabular array above suggests that the figure of onslaught off Malaya and the Singapore Straits has somewhat increased in 2009 compared with 2008. This may be explained by the fact that few plagiarists have been arrested and tried. Given that one of the chief feature of buccaneering is its mobility, it is believed that while the attending was focused on the Malacca Straits, the same plagiarists have transferred their activities to other countries.

Second, some uncertainties can be cast on figures ‘ dependability. It seems that the reported onslaughts are “ no more than the tip of an iceberg ” ( EKLA-F 2005 ) since shipmasters, ship-owners and authoritiess are non willing to describe pirate incidents for a figure of grounds linked to costs ( they fear lifting insurance premiums and expensive holds due to patrol probes ) , repute ( captains “ do non desire to be regarded as undependable bearer of cargo ” [ WILSON-ROBERTS 2000 ] and authoritiess do non desire their Waterss to be considered as insecure, which would ensue in vass avoiding to pass through through these waterways ) , corruptness ( functionaries and larboard workers involved in buccaneering do surely non describe onslaughts they have carried out or contributed to ) , long constabulary enquiries ( for illustration, local fishermen are loath to describe incidents to avoid being “ burdened by constabulary probe that could intend being interviewed seven or eight times ” [ MURPHY 2009: p.90 ] , and to “ linguistic communication barriers or deficiency of communicating equipment ” [ STOREY 2008: p.105 ] . Harmonizing to Wilson-Roberts ( 2000 ) , “ the existent figure of onslaught is half every bit much once more as the reported figure. ” Besides, figures about pirate incidents are chiefly issued by the IMB but this organic structure has been criticized on some histories. First, as Murphy explains ( 2009: p.65 ) , “ the IMB depends upon self-reporting. The figures are hence self-reported. ” Then, its Piracy Reporting Center does non consistently distinguish existent and attempted onslaughts, nor buccaneering and sea robbery. In the latest instance, “ critics argue that this is debatable in that buccaneering is an issue that demands international cooperation, while sea robbery is a domestic affair under the horizon of coastal governments. ” ( STOREY 2008: p. 99 )