Articles and Blog

Addis Ababa, November 4, 2013 – Experts from the European Union (EU) was sent by Brussels, through the Support Mechanism of Africa-EU Partnership, to the Headquarters of the African Union Commission (AUC) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia to discuss, share experiences and prospect viable ways of cooperation with respect to the 2050 Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy (2050 AIM-Strategy). The EU expert mission was led by Vice-Admirals Patrick Hebrard, Anthony Dymock and Fernando del Pozo. For four (4) days (28 October – 1st November 2013), this delegation had an intense workshop with the 2050 Africa’s Integrated Maritime Strategy (2050 AIM-Strategy) Task Force so to first get to know more about the content of the 2050 AIM-Strategy and its Plan of Action, then learn from African perspectives on how the continent is strategically planning to address the challenges and opportunities of its inland waters, seas and oceans, and by the same token provide recommendations and suggestions based upon their experience and expertise in order to better improve the 2050 AIM-Strategy. The two parties agreed that an efficient and effective implementation of the 2050 AIM-Strategy and its Plan of Action would provide socio-economic benefits to the African populations through enhanced safety and security. The Africa-EU partnership facilitated the mission and enabled exchanges between the AU Task Force and the Vice-Admirals who work as the Wise Pens. The Wise Pens International provides in-depth independent analysis, authoritative orientation and advice to governmental and non-governmental institutions in maritime-related affairs, together with strategies and solutions to address the challenging waves leading to a safe, secure and stable maritime domain that will guarantee a sustainable Blue Economy and Blue Growth. For further details on the 2050 AIM-Strategy and its Plan of Action, please visit Mr Samuel Kame-Domguia and VAdm Patrick Hebrard

The European Maritime Security Strategy in the context of the European Security Strategy

The European Union initiated a Security Strategy with the document “A Secure Europe in a Better World” subtitled “European Security Strategy” (ESS). It was approved in 2003 and reviewed in a “Progress Report” in 2008. The document provides a conceptual basis for European security across the spectrum of human activity. The challenges, risks, threats, objectives and policies are addressed in isolation from their environment. There is no discussion of whether challenges should be met, or threats contained, by land or by sea or by purely political action,for example. Piracy is singled out albeit only under the generic heading of organised crime (page 4): “a new dimension to organised crime which will merit further attention is the growth in maritime piracy”

A maritime security strategy for the European Union

The European Security Strategy of 2003 does not explicitly address the maritime domain, where the complex span of threats, risks, vulnerabilities and challenges requires a fundamentally different approach to strategic monitoring and governance from that which applies ashore. As an integrated space it is conducive to a comprehensive approach and must be addressed holistically if the EU is to contain the inherent vulnerability to opportunistic exploitation or asymmetric attack on its territory, interests or citizenry.Although the European Security Strategy’s 2003 objectives remain valid, there have been significant changes in the security environment.

Violence is less frequently used as an acknowledged tool of the state, but more frequently outsourced to proxies that can be supportedor denied by the state. The Lisbon Treaty’s Clause 222 has brought new solidarity obligations. Perceptions of security itself have also changed since 2003. The traditional division of responsibility between defence by military forces and security by law enforcement institutions now appears too restrictive and inflexible to cope, either at state level with the globalisation of terrorist and criminal networks and the growth of ungoverned space in weak and failing states or, at the personal level, with the additional threats that EU citizens now perceive to their environment and personal security with respect to safety,freedom and prosperity through assured access to resources including energy, food and cyberspace.

While land borders separate countries, the sea connects them in a globalised market place of investment, trade and supply chains. The security and governance of these interconnected activities have to be addressed holistically, otherwise any vulnerability is liable tobe exploited. Providing appropriate security is a political challenge involving the management of real and popularly perceived risk and a balance of investment in appropriate capabilities. The lack of visibility and understanding of maritime affairs and dependency,often referred to as sea blindness, has allowed a mismatch to develop in the balance of security investment between the land, air and sea domains which requires redress.Until the emergence of maritime terrorism and the resurgence of high profile piracy, many states and the shipping community were relatively content with the sea remaining an essentially ungoverned space. Although technology is now enabling surveillance and monitoring of that space, effective governance depends on cooperative information sharing and coordinated enforcement (preferably far from EU shores) by different assets and capabilities,which has yet to develop in the EU and more widely.Enabling that development requires a strategy, which this first attempt at a European Maritime Security Strategy seeks to propose by analysing the maritime environment, identifying the strategic objectives and how they might be achieved. The European Maritime Security Strategy key objectives are:• Ensuring stability and security• Addressing the threats• Protecting the environment• Contributing to a better world;By matching the tasks derived from the European Security Strategy with the required capabilities, some suitable approaches to the challenges, risks and threats are offered while avoiding, as a strategic level document, impinging on operational concepts and tactical