DR2, DR P1 and P3
Piracy-related incidents off the coast of West Africa are increasingly in focus and the high security cost of sailing through the Gulf of Guinea is posing concern to Danish shipping companies, Danish television news magazine DR2 Morgen reports. CEO and founder of Risk Intelligence, Hans Tino Hansen, visited national TV DR2 Morgen to talk about the maritime threat environment in the Gulf of Guinea and the Danish government’s new piracy strategy, which includes a refocussing of efforts from East Africa to West Africa.
When the Danish government earlier this year presented a new piracy strategy for 2015 to 2018, it included a new plan on partaking in piracy-combatting efforts in the Gulf of Guinea. Denmark already has successful experience with being part of counter-piracy efforts from its engagement in the Gulf of Aden in East Africa. However, piracy in West Africa differs significantly from piracy in East Africa, Hans Tino Hansen tells DR2 Morgen.
“In East Africa, piracy was mainly characterized by simple straightforward hijacking for ransom. Piracy off the coast of Nigeria is far more complicated,” Hans Tino Hansen explains. “West African maritime crime spans over everything from small harbor thefts over kidnap for ransom to opportunistic armed piracy to planned large-scale hijacking of product tankers.. This is a high surplus demanded in Nigeria as Nigeria have crude oil, but lack refineries to produce enough products for the market. For this reason, there is a massive demand and a large black market for refined oil.”
The hijackings of product tankers off the coast of Nigeria signifies that larger crime syndicates with connections to military and political circles are involved, Hans Tino Hansen informs DR2 Morgen. So while Somalia posed a challenge and piracy threat by being a failed state, this was what allowed international actors to operate more or less freely when pursuing pirates. In West Africa, Nigeria and other West African states, pose a challenge to international piracy-combatting efforts by being sovereign states wanting to protect their own waters and exercise their own national jurisdiction – despite the possible lack of ability or interest to do so. In Nigeria, where the piracy-problem is the biggest, the piracy problem “is simply not a strategic problem” Hans Tino Hansen tells DR2 Morgen: “A strategic problem for Nigeria is one such as Boko Haram in northern Nigeria. In contrast to this group, which the Nigerian military has to deploy a lot of resources to combat, piracy is not much more than a mere irritation – rather, it is in some cases a source to funding for certain circles.”
To the question of what the different circumstances in West Africa means for the future Danish engagement here, Hans Tino Hansen says that it is pivotal to look at the effort regionally and to include willing neighboring countries: “If we can succeed in helping neighboring countries by developing and capacity-building their maritime capabilities and local authorities, then we can contain the Nigerian problem while at the same time trying to work with Nigeria”.
To see the full interview with Hans Tino Hansen in Danish, click here. To hear a similar interview with Hans Tino Hansen in Danish by the radio news magazine P1, click here. To hear Hans Tino Hansen’s comments on piracy in West Africa – also in Danish – to the Danish popular radio show P3, click here.
The Straits Times
Singapore Straits (Karsten von Hoesslin)
Since last year, reports of pirate attacks in the waters surrounding Singapore has been on the rise. Especially fuel and oil-related incidents have increased significantly, the Straits Times writes in their article ‘Piracy in Asia on the rise’. Special projects manager for Risk Intelligence, Karsten von Hoesslin, contributes to the article by sharing his insight on crime and pirate syndicates in Southeast Asia.
According to von Hoesslin, fuel is “the perfect product to steal” in Southeast Asia. A lucrative regional black market exists for the commodity, as fuel “is nearly untraceable”; often blended with other materials or sold directly on to other vessels. Efforts to curb the attacks are therefore challenging and they are further hindered by the fact that Asian pirate syndicates are extremely hard to map. Whereas “foot soldiers” are primarily Indonesian, “middlemen and big bosses” are often Malaysian and Singaporean. And "[t]he money often ends up in a 'Big Boss' Singaporean bank account", von Hoesslin tells the Straits Times. All of these factors combined make it only expectable that fuel-related piracy incidents will continue to occur in Asia, according to von Hoessling.
Singapore is the no. 1 bunker market in the world. However, as von Hoesslin finally explains in ‘Piracy in Asia on the rise’, the Singaporean market is also “known for a darker side to its bunkering legacy. Syndicates have acknowledged that bunkering agents in Singapore are often the 'insider information' link that is compromised when it comes to the security of the vessel and cargo."
To read the full article, click here. To read another article using Karsten von Hoesslin’s comments on the rise in fuel-related piracy in Asia, published by BunkerWorld, click here. Note that the latter link is only viewable for subscribers.
After Iran’s arrest of Maersk Tigris in the Strait of Hormuz, the US Navy has been escorting British and American vessels through the narrow strait. Maersk Line, which still awaits information from Iran on Maersk Tigris’ arrest, has not employed any new security measures. Rather, the carrier has opted for merely encouraging a “more cautious” approach among its vessels in the Hormuz area. To Shipping Watch, CEO and founder of Risk Intelligence, Hans Tino Hansen lays out three possible scenarios related to the Iranian arrest of Maersk Tigris, which may explain the crisis as well as the differing responses thereto.
The worst-case scenario is according to Hans Tino Hansen the scenario that underlies Iran’s official explanation of why Maersk Tigris was arrested: “… if a civil lawsuit is in fact the reason this ship was arrested… all parties with even the slightest ties to business relations in the country could face a potential risk of a similar incident. One could ask why the Iranians would pick a ship that in fact has nothing to do with Maersk Line beyond the fact that the carrier has chartered it," Hansen says.
However, this worst-case scenario is also the least likely, according to Hansen. A second, more likely scenario is based on intelligence: “There are numerous factors indicating that the Revolutionary Guard is behind this. This means there could be some internal Iranian political matter behind the incident, where someone wanted to fan the flame, so to speak, following the nuclear negotiations, in order to see how the world and not least the US would react. If so, this is likely an isolated event that will not develop further, and which will hopefully be resolved soon," Hansen tells Shipping Watch.
To read the full article and learn about the third scenario, click here.
IHS Maritime 360: Safety and Security
In an interview with Girija Shettar from IHS Maritime 360, CEO of Risk Intelligence, Hans Tino Hansen, warns that Shipping-related businesses could be at risk while operating in the Persian Gulf.
Since the Iranian Revolutionary Guards on 28 April seized the ship Maersk Tigris in the Strait of Hormuz, the United States has sent navy ships to escort US-flagged vessels in the area. Commenting on the arrest, which allegedly was due to an unresolved commercial case between Maersk and an Iranian company, Hans Tino Hansen tells IHS Maritime; “the problem is quite big. You have a situation where any company or any vessel that is connected directly or indirectly to a court case or potential court case or commercial dispute in Iran could face arrest in the Persian Gulf. That could be the conclusion and that has potential for a lot of problems”.
However, Hansen also points out to IHS Maritime that “If [the arrest was not actually carried out on the basis of a commercial claim], then it might be a smokescreen - the result of a game between hardliners and those, in Iran, who want negotiations with the international community… If the Americans had sent in a destroyer and something had happened - that would be the end of the negotiations”. The official Iranian explanation of a civil lawsuit as laying ground for the arrest of Maersk Tigris can be viewed as a ‘loophole’ out of a sticky domestically rooted political situation, according to Hans Tino Hansen. Yet, Hans Tino Hansen underlines to IHS Maritime that ship operators should stay very cautious when operating in the area around the Strait of Hormuz, as “you actually don't know what is going to be the rule going forward”.
To read the full online article of IHS Maritime, click here.
Risk Intelligence CEO, Hans Tino Hansen, calls it ‘an unheard use of force’ from Iranian side if a civil debt issue is what has forced the ship ‘Maersk Tigris’ from international waters to Iran. Other reasons must lay behind the violent arrest, he tells the Danish maritime news magazine Søfart.
Iran’s official explanation of the Iranian military’s strange boarding and detainment of Maersk Tigris is now that the arrest stems from an unresolved debt issue between Maersk and Iranian companies. In relation to this statement, Maersk Lines has confirmed that they do have an unresolved civil debt issue with an Iranian company. This allegedly stems from 2005 where about 10 containers were shipped to Dubai for an Iranian company. The containers were never picked up and ended up being assigned to the United Arab Emirates’ authorities. The assignment led to a long-lasting, still unresolved lawsuit, Søfart writes. Commenting on the issue for Søfart, Hans Tino Hansen says, however, that other reasons than a civil lawsuit should lay behind the violent arrest of Maersk Tigris: “If the issue of debt proves to be the foundation, then it is madness. It is unheard of that one uses military power to seize a ship in internationally recognized waters, only to clarify what is in fact a civil lawsuit. In such case, it opens for a complete chaos on the high seas”.
Risk Intelligence believes it is more likely that Iran’s official debt explanation serves as a smokescreen for the West and a resort for the Iranians. As previously explained to Søfart, Risk Intelligence believe the Iranians use the debt explanation to escape a tense international situation essentially rooted in domestic political infighting between so-called hardliners and more Western-oriented and negotiation-friendly politicians (in Iran).
To read the full article in Danish, follow this link: http://soefart.dk/?art=6574. Please note that only subscribers of Søfart have full access to the article.