EUNAVFOR versus Somali piracy – A war worth winning?*

*Moderator’s Note:  This article was posted on Defence iQ on 30 March.  The first paragraph is reproduced here, along with a link the remainder of the article, with the permission of the editor.

Policy is the player

The EU’s response (Operation ATALANTA) to Somali Piracy under the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), once hailed as progressive, is now facing increasing criticism from western press and policymakers.  Having been extended beyond its original tenure, it is now caste by many as a limited operation designed to provide a conventional response to an unconventional threat. Several iterations of the same policy have been launched to prop this mission: United Nations Security Council Resolutions 1814 (2008), 1816 (2008), 1838 (2008) and 1846 (2008).  Since that time it has been extended by UN Resolution 1950 (2010) and is scheduled to run until at least the end of 2012. Indeed, the UNSC’s decision to promulgate yet another extension of Atalanta’s mission seems only to confirm that its success or failure will not be measured by the results it actually produces (or indeed, fails to produce). On paper, it aims to:

  • Protect vessels of the WFP delivering food aid to displaced persons in Somalia;
  • Protect vulnerable vessels cruising off the Somali coast, and to deter, prevent and repress acts of piracy and armed robbery off the Somali coast;
  • Monitor fishing activities off the coast of Somalia.

Read the entire article on Defence iQ here.