( ) Their turn’s wrong. Pirates fail to stop waste transit and it’s mostly just a rouse.
This evidence internally quotes Andrew Mwangura, who is the Director the Seafarers' Assistance Programme. At times, he has been asked to be a negotiator between pirates and ship owners off the coast of Africa. Horand Knaup – journalist for Real Clear World and Spiegel – reporting from Mombasa, Kenya – “Prelude to Piracy: The Poor Fishermen of Somalia” – Spiegel Online International – Dec 4, 2008 – http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/prelude-to-piracy-the-poor-fishermen-of-somalia-a-594457.html
The UN envoy to Somalia, Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, said last October that the UN has "reliable information that Europeanand Asian companies are dumpingtoxic waste, including nuclear waste, off the Somali coastline." An Excuse for the Pirates In Mombasa, Kenya, pirate expert Andrew Mwangura complains "thattoxic waste has been dumped in Somalia for a long time," and that the international community is looking on and "doing nothing about it," thereby giving the pirates "a convenient excuse to legitimize their actions." The words of UN Envoy Ould-Abdallah were confirmed only a few days later, when leaking containers of toxic waste were washed ashore in Harardhere, about 200 kilometers (124 miles) south of Mogadishu. Animals in the area contracted unusual diseases, and coastal residents suffered coughing and vomiting attacks. The lack of scruples displayed by foreigners using Somali waters to dump their toxic waste is not all that surprising: proper waste disposal in Europe costs about 400 times as much as illegal dumping in Somalia. The extent of ocean dumping of toxic waste is just as poorly documented as the claims of adverse effects on fish populations off the coast. Speculation abounds, and yet there are no reliable studies from the last 20 years. The fact is, however, that Somali fishermen, for various reasons, have been catching fewer and fewer fish in their nets for years. While the fishermen complained quietly, the members of another profession -- the pirate trade -- have been quick to claim the plight of the fishermen as their own. The Somali pirates have repeatedly argued that they were forced into piracy by the demise of fishing and the practice of dumping toxic waste at sea. But the truth is that only a small fraction of traditional fishermen have switched to piracy. When the recently hijacked supertanker Sirius Star dropped anchor off Harardhere, former army General Mohamed Nureh Abdulle told the BBC that the hijackers were unknown, and that they had not attempted to establish contact with the coastal population. Elsewhere along the coast, it is often unknown men -- not former local fishermen -- who are guarding the ships and waiting for ransom money. Attractive Piracy Nevertheless, toxic waste and illegal foreign fishing are convenient arguments for the pirates. "The Somali coastline has been destroyed, and we believe this money is nothing compared to the devastation that we have seen on the seas," said Januna Ali Jama, a spokesman for the pirate group that is still waiting for its ransom for the MV Faina, a Ukrainian vessel carrying tanks and military hardware. Pirate life is attractive. The profits are immense, even though the men carrying out the hijackings keep only about 30 percent of the ransom money. Of the remainder, 20 percent goes to the bosses, 30 percent is paid in bribes to government officials and 20 percent is set aside for future actions. The pirates are quick to accept losses. Even though a number of pirates are now in prison in Paris, in the Kenyan port city of Mombasa and in Bosaso, Somalia's main port, and although the international community has sent a small armada of warships to Somalia, the hijackers are getting more and more audacious, targeting supertankers and ships transporting weapons, luxury yachts and chemical tankers.In what was apparently a coordinated effort, on Tuesday night they attempted to attack five ships simultaneously in waters east of Somalia. A short time earlier, they had attacked the luxury cruise ship MS Nautica, with more than 1,000 passengers on board. None of the attacks succeeded -- but this will not deter the pirates. Bosaso, Eyl and Hobyo, which, until recently, were miserably poor fishing towns, are barely recognizable today. Small mansions are popping up by the dozen, new restaurants are opening their doors, giant weddings are all the rage and the imports of four-wheel-drive SUVs are booming. Clan affiliation, long one of the key impediments to development in Somalia, is suddenly irrelevant. With ransom money pouring into coastal towns, former differences are fading into the background.
( ) Zero link and Turn. Pirates are no longer really in it to fight waste shipments. And, our advantage increases international crackdown on BOTH piracy AND illegal waste.
Ms. Aiko Shimizu is a Resident Sasakawa Peace Foundation (SPF) Fellow at the Pacific Forum CSIS. She received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and International Studies from the University of Chicago and her graduate degrees from Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA) and the University of Pennsylvania Law School. Ms. Shimizu’s professional experiences include working at the United Nations, Permanent Mission of Japan to the UN, and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. “Stop Dumping Toxic Waste to Defeat Somali Piracy” – Atlantic-Community.Org – May 20th – http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/index.php/Open_Think_Tank_Article/Stop_Dumping_Toxic_Waste_to_Defeat_Somali_Piracy
Experts attribute piracy to the lack of a functioning government in Somalia since civil war broke out in the nation following the fall of Mohamed Siad Barre’s regime in 1991. However, one issue that I think needs to be addressed on equal grounds is the other side of the piracy issue: the woes of the victimsof foreign toxic waste dumping and illegal fishing in waters around Somalia. While I agree thatthose who currently use this rhetoric to engage in the lucrative business of piracy are no longer limited to the poor fishermen who fell victim tothese instances of toxicwaste dumping and illegal fishing, transatlantic partners must do more to address the impacts of their own nationals’ toxic waste dumping and illegal fishing on these local populations.Moreover, because the disposal of industrial and nuclear waste costs over ten times in developed countries as it does in developing countries, many corporations from developed countries have often chosen Africa as their target to dispose of this waste. Both toxic waste dumping and illegal fishing in developing countries have only served to exacerbate the socioeconomic conditions of developing countries. After all, fish is an important source of protein for many people in developing countries and fishing is a way for coastal communities to make a living. Toxic waste dumping has also led to environmental degradation, as well as health hazards, where the rate of cancer and deformity have increased in some populations that lived near areas where radioactive wastes had been disposed. The international community has so far only attempted to resolve the issue of piracy in Somalia through increasing international patrolsand the prosecution of pirates. Others have suggested aiding Somalia in its state building process so that the state will be able to effectively punish those who are involved in acts of piracy and to eliminate the problem on its own. Yet transatlantic partners have continued to ignore the actions of their own corporations, so they are not doing enough to protect the coastal communities and fisheries in Somalia and other developing countries. The international mechanisms to prevent such illegal dumping exist. The “UN Convention on the Law of the Seas” serves to protect states’ territorial waters by defining an “Exclusive Economic Zone” and the “Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal” has attempted to reduce the rate of transfer of hazardous wastes between developed and developing states. What is missing is international enforcement of these laws and conventions to protect the people in developing nations and to hold corporations accountable for violating these laws.
( ) not unique – efforts of the Somali pirate fail. Doesn’t solve waste dumping.
Dan Eden – staff writer for Viewzone – “Ecology Pirates of Somalia?” This article also appears under the title “Somali Pirates: The Other Side of the Story” – April 19th, 2009 – http://www.viewzone.com/pirates.html
Humans are an amazing species. We are capable of the best and worst. At best we can survive and struggle against almost anything to ensure our survival. The Somali people did. Faced with no government to protect them from the pollution of their ocean, and the depletion of their only source of food, they organized against the dumping. They organized locally in tribes, and the tribes organized clans. With no coast guard, the Somali fishermen tried to thwart off the huge ships that were dumping uranium, mercury, lead, medical waste and other toxins on their food supply and livelihood. They knew their small effort would have little effect on the huge dumping companies... but maybe if the world knew... maybe the world would stop them.
A-to “Little Data on Nuclear Waste Dumping in Somalia”
( ) Facts about waste dumping are suppressed
Dan Eden – staff writer for Viewzone – “Ecology Pirates of Somalia?” This article also appears under the title “Somali Pirates: The Other Side of the Story” – April 19th, 2009 – http://www.viewzone.com/pirates.html
In August of 2008, a group of about 40 Somalis attacked and seized an Iranian cargo ship, the Dyanat and took it to the port of Eyl. There it was secured by a larger group of about 100 Somalis. Within days of securing the ship, those Somalis that had been on board and inspected the cargo began to develop strange health problems. They had strange skin burns, loss of hair, nausea... and a number of men died. The actual cargo containers were securely locked and the crew claimed they did not have the access codes to open them. At first the captain said the containers contained "crude oil" but later admitted they were carrying "minerals." After a week the ransom was paid and the ship continued. Many believe it contained radioactive waste that would have been dumped had the SomaliÃs not intervened. But humans are also capable of the worst. Despite theItalian Greenpeace announcement in 1992 that this activity was going on,despite the United Nations warning in that same year, despite the Italian parliament's recognition of these activities in 2000,the thousands of Somali people who are sick, the mutations and hundreds of deaths and contaminated fish, even today, these facts are suppressed.The European nations who signed contracts with Achair and Progresso could care less about a poor country with dark skinned people. In the color spectrum of greed, green trumps every color. It is much easier to ferment hatred for brown or black skinned "pirates" than to admit the real reason for these desperate acts. It is much easier to just "kill them all" than to step in to their shoes (or lack of shoes) and see what options you might choose.
Utilitarianism is bad
Utilitarianism is bad – justifies the worst atrocities in the name of a hypothetical “greater good”. Holt ‘95
(Jim, commentator for the BBC, writes frequently about politics and philosophy, New York Times, “Morality, Reduced To Arithmetic,” August 5, p. Lexis)
Can the deliberate massacre of innocent people ever be condoned? The atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki on Aug. 6 and 9, 1945, resulted in the deaths of 120,000 to 250,000 Japanese by incineration and radiation poisoning. Although a small fraction of the victims were soldiers, the great majority were noncombatants -- women, children, the aged. Among the justifications that have been put forward for President Harry Truman’s decision to use the bomb, only oneis worth taking seriously -- that it saved lives. The alternative, the reasoning goes, was to launch an invasion. Truman claimed in his memoirs that this would have cost another half a million American lives. Winston Churchill put the figure at a million. Revisionist historians have cast doubt on such numbers. Wartime documents suggest that military planners expected around 50,000 American combat deaths in an invasion. Still, when Japanese casualties, military and civilian, are taken into account, the overall invasion death toll on both sides would surely have ended up surpassing that from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Scholars will continue to argue over whether there were other, less catastrophic ways to force Tokyo to surrender. But given the fierce obstinacy of the Japanese militarists, Truman and his advisers had some grounds for believing that nothing short of a full-scale invasion or the annihilation of a big city with an apocalyptic new weapon would have succeeded. Suppose they were right. Would this prospect have justified the intentional mass killing of the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? In the debate over the question, participantson both sides have beenplaying the numbers game.Estimate the hypothetical number of lives saved by the bombings, then add up the actual lives lost. If the first number exceeds the second, then Truman did the right thing; if the reverse, it was wrong to have dropped the bombs. That is one approach to the matter -- the utilitarian approach. According to utilitarianism, a form of moral reasoning that arose in the 19th century, the goodness or evil of an action is determined solely by its consequences. If somehow you can save 10 lives by boiling a baby, go ahead and boil that baby.There is, however, an older ethical tradition, one rooted in Judeo-Christian theology, that takes a quite different view. The gist of it is expressed by St. Paul’s condemnation of those who say, “Let us do evil, that good may come.” Some actions, this tradition holds, can never be justified by their consequences; they are absolutely forbidden. It is always wrong to boil a baby even if lives are saved thereby. Applying this absolutist morality to war can be tricky. When enemy soldiers are trying to enslave or kill us, the principle of self-defense permits us to kill them (though not to slaughter them once they are taken prisoner). But what of those who back them? During World War II, propagandists made much of the “indivisibility” of modern warfare: the idea was that since the enemy nation’s entire economic and social strength was deployed behind its military forces, the whole population was a legitimate target for obliteration. “There are no civilians in Japan,” declared an intelligence officer of the Fifth Air Force shortly before the Hiroshima bombing, a time when the Japanese were popularly depicted as vermin worthy of extermination. The boundary between combatant and noncombatant can be fuzzy, but the distinction is not meaningless, as the case of small children makes clear. Yet is wartime killing of those who are not trying to harm us always tantamount to murder? When naval dockyards, munitions factories and supply lines are bombed, civilian carnage is inevitable. The absolutist moral tradition acknowledges this by a principle known as double effect: although it is always wrong to kill innocents deliberately, it is sometimes permissible to attack a military target knowing some noncombatants will die as a side effect. The doctrine of double effect might even justify bombing a hospital where Hitler is lying ill. It does not, however, apply to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Transformed into hostages by the technology of aerial bombardment, the people of those cities were intentionally executed en masse to send a message of terror to the rulers of Japan. The practice of ordering the massacre of civilians to bring the enemy to heel scarcely began with Truman. Nor did the bomb result in casualties of a new order of magnitude. The earlier bombing of Tokyo by incendiary weapons killed some 100,000 people. What Hiroshima and Nagasaki did mark, by the unprecedented need for rationalization they presented, was the triumph of utilitarian thinking in the conduct of war.The conventional code of noncombatant immunity -- a product of several centuries of ethical progress among nations, which had been formalized by an international commission in the 1920’s in the Hague -- was swept away. A simpler axiom took its place: since war is hell, any means necessary may be used to end, in Churchill’s words, “the vast indefinite butchery.” It is a moral calculus that, for all its logical consistency, offendsour deep-seated intuitions about the sanctity of life -- our conviction that a person is always to be treated as an end, never as a means. Left up to the warmakers, moreover, utilitarian calculations are susceptible to bad-faith reasoning: tinker with the numbers enough and virtually any atrocity can be excused in the national interest. In January, the world commemorated the 50th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, where mass slaughter was committed as an end in itself -- the ultimate evil. The moral nature of Hiroshima is ambiguous by contrast. Yet in the postwar era, when governments do not hesitate to treat the massacre of civilians as just another strategic option, thebomb’s sinisterlegacyis plain: ithas inuredus to the idea of reducing innocents to instruments andmorality to arithmetic.
Toxic colonialism should be rejected as evil – it’s fundamentally unethical.
Kone Lassana – student, who – at the time, was completing a Masters of Law degree – This dissertation was prepared under the supervision of Mr. Imeru Tamirat, Faculty of Law, Addis Ababa University – “Pollution in Africa: A new toxic waste colonialism? An assessment of compliance of the Bamako Convention in Cote d’Ivoire. Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree LLM, Maters of Law, for the Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa Centre for Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria – Oct 30th – http://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/12433/kone.pdf?sequence=1.
The new toxic waste colonialism can be defined as the migration of the dirty industries to the less developed countries.The need for cash in the developing Countries has led to a new export market -toxic garbage.Industrialized countries are exporting their waste to emerging nations, capitalizing on less expensive disposal cost.2 Africa has today the unfortunate distinction of being the first choice for the dumping of European wastes3. Recent statistics have revealed that most of the people involved in the evil businesses of trafficking in drugs, human, arms and trading in weaponry, are diverting into the so called new evil business of “Trade in Radioactive waste” because this new evil business financially exceeds the rest of the above listed evil businesses. This is clearly proved by the recent toxic waste disposed in Abidjan Cote D’Ivoire in August 2006. Indeed the incident in Abidjan is symptomatic of the new toxic waste colonialism. On 19 August 2006, a Panamanian flagged ship; the “Probo koala” unloaded a toxic waste shipment in Abidjan, the main economic capital of Cote d’Ivoire. Slops from the ship were dumped on open ground in eleven (11) unsecured sites throughout the densely populated city of Abidjan. 5 Nineteen (19) persons died, and ten of thousands have been made ill with diarrhoea, vomiting, breathing problems and nosebleeds from the slops. The Ivorian media was filled with speculation over the scandal described as the’’ Ivorian Chernobyl’’. While exploring the new forms of pollution in Africa, this study also intends to look at the incident in Cote d’Ivoire viewed by commentators as the biggest toxic dumping scandal of the 21st century. The precedent in Abidjan is the type of environmental vandalism that international treaties are supposed to prevent6. The case of the Probo Koala is sadly only part of a growing trend known as toxic waste colonialism, in which underdeveloped states are used as inexpensive disposal sitesfor waste turned away by developed states.7 The resulting harm frequently amounts to serious human rights violations. In the case of the Probo Koala, the right to health and the right tolifewere seriously threatened.8
More Coop needed, solves Nuclear Waste
( ) Coop insufficient now – boosting it solves policing and environmental challenges.
Prof. TD (Thean) Potgieter is currently Chief Director Research and Innovation at PALAMA (Public Administration Leadership and Management Academy). His previous appointment was as Director of the Centre for Military Studies, Faculty of Military Science, Stellenbosch University. He is also the Secretary-General of the South African of Military History Commission and is the recipient of a number of academic and military awards. Note: this card ends with a colon – but afterwards is simply a new set of bullet points listing off regional organizations. “Maritime security in the Indian Ocean: strategic setting and features” – Institute for Security Studies – PAPER 236 – AUGUST 2012 – http://www.issafrica.org/uploads/Paper236.pdf
Much can be gained from a cooperative regional approach between states that promotes consultation not confrontation, reassurance not deterrence, transparency not secrecy, prevention not correction, and interdependence not unilateralism. In such circumstances navies can contribute much towards enhancing maritime security, managing disasters, providing humanitarian assistance and limiting environmental security challenges. Regional cooperationcan therefore be a force multiplier and is certainly desirablein the vast, relatively poorly policed Indian Ocean.The Indian Ocean region is noted for its complex sub-regional geopolitical and geostrategic associations, each with its own vested interest. Cooperation occurs mostly in the spheres of economy and trade, rather than in security, and is to a large extent hampered by distrust and lack of interaction. On a sub-regional level cooperation exists in the Persian Gulf, South Asia, South-East Asia, East Africa, the Horn of Africa, Southern Africa, and the south-west Indian Ocean islands. There are overlapping regional systems in the greater Middle East, Africa and the Asia Pacific region. The following are the most pertinent examples of regional and sub-regional cooperation: 80