French black soldiers excluded in ‘whites only’ liberation of Paris

 

Remember the old world war II pictures of the liberation of Paris in 1944, and troops marching on the Avenue des Champs-Élysées Paris? There were no black soldiers there. They should have marched in Paris, but papers unearthed by the BBC reveal that British and American commanders ensured that the liberation of Paris on 25 August 1944 was seen as a "whites only" victory.

It’s the story Tirailleurs Senegalais (Senegalees Riflemen). The BBC's Document programme has seen evidence that black colonial soldiers - who made up around two-thirds of Free French forces - were deliberately removed from the unit that led the Allied advance into the French capital.

By the time France fell in June 1940, 17,000 of its black, mainly Tirailleurs Senegalais lay dead. Many of them were simply shot where they stood soon after surrendering to German troops who often regarded them as sub-human savages.

Their chance for revenge came in August 1944 as Allied troops prepared to retake Paris. But despite their overwhelming numbers, they were not to get it.

The leader of the Free French forces, Charles de Gaulle, made it clear that he wanted his Frenchmen to lead the liberation of Paris.

American General Frederick Morgan Allied High Command agreed, but only on one condition: De Gaulle's division must not contain any black soldiers.

Because the French couldn’t form an all white division, they filled the gaps with soldiers from parts of North Africa and the Middle East.

Leopold Sedar Senghor, who in 1960 became the first President of independent Senegal, had served in the Tirailleurs Senegalais and was a POW during WWII. He wrote the poem "Slam par Manu", which is cited in video below

The Tirailleurs Senegalais also occupied the German Rhineland after World war I. Their mixed German children, known as the Rhineland children, fell victim to the Nazi regime.

The story of the Tirailleurs Senegalais is a constant reminder that black history is everywhere.

 

Paris liberation made 'whites only'

By Mike Thomson  Presenter, Document, BBC Radio 4 Many of the "French" division which led the liberation of Paris were Spanish Papers unearthed by the BBC reveal that British and American commanders ensured that the liberation of Paris on 25 August 1944 was seen as a "whites only" victory. Many who fought Nazi Germany during World War II did so to defeat the vicious racism that left millions of Jews dead. Yet the BBC's Document programme has seen evidence that black colonial soldiers - who made up around two-thirds of Free French forces - were deliberately removed from the unit that led the Allied advance into the French capital. By the time France fell in June 1940, 17,000 of its black, mainly West African colonial troops, known as the Tirailleurs Senegalais, lay dead. Many of them were simply shot where they stood soon after surrendering to German troops who often regarded them as sub-human savages. Their chance for revenge came in August 1944 as Allied troops prepared to retake Paris. But despite their overwhelming numbers, they were not to get it. 'More desirable' The leader of the Free French forces, Charles de Gaulle, made it clear that he wanted his Frenchmen to lead the liberation of Paris.  I have told Colonel de Chevene that his chances of getting what he wants will be vastly improved if he can produce a white infantry division  General Frederick Morgan Allied High Command agreed, but only on one condition: De Gaulle's division must not contain any black soldiers. In January 1944 Eisenhower's Chief of Staff, Major General Walter Bedell Smith, was to write in a memo stamped, "confidential": "It is more desirable that the division mentioned above consist of white personnel. "This would indicate the Second Armoured Division, which with only one fourth native personnel, is the only French division operationally available that could be made one hundred percent white." At the time America segregated its own troops along racial lines and did not allow black GIs to fight alongside their white comrades until the late stages of the war. Morocco division Given the fact that Britain did not segregate its forces and had a large and valued Indian army, one might have expected London to object to such a racist policy. Yet this does not appear to have been the case. Charles de Gaulle wanted Frenchmen to lead the liberation of Paris A document written by the British General, Frederick Morgan, to Allied Supreme Command stated: "It is unfortunate that the only French formation that is 100% white is an armoured division in Morocco. "Every other French division is only about 40% white. I have told Colonel de Chevene that his chances of getting what he wants will be vastly improved if he can produce a white infantry division." Finding an all-white division that was available proved to be impossible due to the enormous contribution made to the French Army by West African conscripts. So, Allied Command insisted that all black soldiers be taken out and replaced by white ones from other units. When it became clear that there were not enough white soldiers to fill the gaps, soldiers from parts of North Africa and the Middle East were used instead. Pensions cut In the end, nearly everyone was happy. De Gaulle got his wish to have a French division lead the liberation of Paris, even though the shortage of white troops meant that many of his men were actually Spanish.  We were colonised by the French. We were forced to go to war... France has not been grateful. Not at all.  Issa Cisse  Former French colonial soldier The British and Americans got their "Whites Only" Liberation even though many of the troops involved were North African or Syrian. For France's West African Tirailleurs Senegalais, however, there was little to celebrate. Despite forming 65% of Free French Forces and dying in large numbers for France, they were to have no heroes' welcome in Paris. After the liberation of the French capital many were simply stripped of their uniforms and sent home. To make matters even worse, in 1959 their pensions were frozen. Former French colonial soldier, Issa Cisse from Senegal, who is now 87 years-old, looks back on it all with sadness and evident resentment. "We, the Senegalese, were commanded by the white French chiefs," he said. "We were colonised by the French. We were forced to go to war. Forced to follow the orders that said, do this, do that, and we did. France has not been grateful. Not at all." Mike Thomson presents Radio 4's Document at 2000BST on Monday 6 April >via: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7984436.stm

Tomgram: Michael Klare, The Oil Rush to Hell

Posted by Michael Klare at 3:50pm, May 18, 2010.

[TomDispatch Follow-Up: Three weeks ago, Noam Chomsky wrote a blistering piece at TomDispatch, “Eyeless in Gaza,” on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  It might be worth a reread or catch his TomCast audio interview here.  This week, the 81-year-old Chomsky got a firsthand taste of the situation there when Israel’s Interior Ministry refused his daughter and him entry into Israel and the West Bank.  He was to give a talk at Bir Zeit University near Ramallah and his rejection ostensibly came, in part, because he was not lecturing at an Israeli university as well (though he has done so many times in the past).  By now, practically an international incident, it caught something of the depressingly extreme mood of the moment in Israel.]

It took President Obama 24 days to finally get publicly angry and “rip” into BP and its partners for the catastrophic oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico.  What was he waiting for?  The pattern has been obvious enough: however bad you thought it was, or anyone said it was at any given moment, it’s worse (and will get worse yet).  Just take the numbers.  

In the first days after the Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded on April 20th, reports from the Coast Guard and BP indicated that no oil was leaking into the Gulf from the damaged well.  Then, the oil giant reported that, actually, about 1,000 barrels a day were coming out of it.  Almost immediately the federal government raised that figure to 5,000 barrels, which remained the generally accepted estimate until, under pressure, BP finally released a dramatic 30-second clip of the actual leak at the wellhead.  By then, according to ABC News, both the company and the White House had had access to the video for three weeks and obviously knew that the gold-standard estimate was wrong by a country mile.  Since then, estimates by scientists viewing the video clip (who have been prevented by BP from visiting the site itself, looking at more material, or taking more accurate measurements), run from 25,000 barrels to a staggering 70,000 barrels a day or more -- up to, that is, 3.4 million gallons of oil daily, which would mean an Exxon Valdez-sized spill every few days.

The BP disaster in the Gulf may prove historic in the worst sense -- especially since much of its damage still remains out of sight, hidden below the surface of the Gulf’s waters in what already are gigantic plumes of oil in the water column going down 4,000 feet that threaten to rob Gulf waters of oxygen and create vast dead zones in areas previously rich in sea life.  Simply put, this is scary stuff, environmental damage on a scale we don’t normally contemplate.  And it’s probably just a start, given that whatever news story comes next only seems to have more of the same -- including the fact that the Obama administration’s Interior Department followed in the infamous footsteps of the Bush administration.  In 2009, it “exempted BP's calamitous Gulf of Mexico drilling operation from a detailed environmental impact analysis.”  (And, of course, mere weeks before the explosion, the president was urging yet more deep-water off-shore drilling and reassuring Americans that it wasn’t terribly dangerous, while less than two weeks before its oil rig blew, BP was vigorously lobbying to expand its exemptions.)

At TomDispatch, Michael Klare, author of the invaluable Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy, has been warning for years that the easy oil and natural gas energy reserves on Planet Earth are quickly disappearing and that we’re entering a “tough oil” era.  Thanks to the depletion of other crucial natural resources as well, the century to come is likely to prove more extreme in many ways, including the climate.  BP has given us an unfortunate taste of that extremity.  And that’s at only 5,000 feet below the waves.  What will happen when BP starts drilling down 35,000 feet under the Gulf for the giant oil reserves it’s dubbed Tiber, located some 250 miles southeast of Houston, and something goes wrong?  Hold your hats.  Simply put, this is the path to hell.  When will an “angry” president really mobilize the government to deal with this disaster (and the others to come)?  Tom

The Relentless Pursuit of Extreme Energy
A New Oil Rush Endangers the Gulf of Mexico and the Planet
By Michael T. Klare

Yes, the oil spewing up from the floor of the Gulf of Mexico in staggering quantities could prove one of the great ecological disasters of human history.  Think of it, though, as just the prelude to the Age of Tough Oil, a time of ever increasing reliance on problematic, hard-to-reach energy sources.  Make no mistake: we’re entering the danger zone.  And brace yourself, the fate of the planet could be at stake. 

It may never be possible to pin down the precise cause of the massive explosion that destroyed the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig on April 20th, killing 11 of its 126 workers.  Possible culprits include a faulty cement plug in the undersea oil bore and a disabled cutoff device known as a blow-out preventer.  Inadequate governmental oversight of safety procedures undoubtedly also contributed to the disaster, which may have been set off by a combination of defective equipment and human error.  But whether or not the immediate trigger of the explosion is ever fully determined, there can be no mistaking the underlying cause: a government-backed corporate drive to exploit oil and natural gas reserves in extreme environments under increasingly hazardous operating conditions.

The New Oil Rush and Its Dangers

The United States entered the hydrocarbon era with one of the world’s largest pools of oil and natural gas.  The exploitation of these valuable and versatile commodities has long contributed to the nation’s wealth and power, as well as to the profitability of giant energy firms like BP and Exxon.  In the process, however, most of our easily accessible onshore oil and gas reservoirs have been depleted, leaving only less accessible reserves in offshore areas, Alaska, and the melting Arctic.  To ensure a continued supply of hydrocarbons -- and the continued prosperity of the giant energy companies -- successive administrations have promoted the exploitation of these extreme energy options with a striking disregard for the resulting dangers.  By their very nature, such efforts involve an ever increasing risk of human and environmental catastrophe -- something that has been far too little acknowledged.

The hunt for oil and gas has always entailed a certain amount of risk.  After all, most energy reserves are trapped deep below the Earth’s surface by overlying rock formations.  When punctured by oil drills, these are likely to erupt in an explosive release of hydrocarbons, the well-known “gusher” effect.  In the swashbuckling early days of the oil industry, this phenomenon -- familiar to us from movies like There Will Be Blood -- often caused human and environmental injury.  Over the years, however, the oil companies became far more adept at anticipating such events and preventing harm to workers or the surrounding countryside. 

Now, in the rush to develop hard-to-reach reserves in Alaska, the Arctic, and deep-offshore waters, we’re returning to a particularly dangerous version of those swashbuckling days.  As energy companies encounter fresh and unexpected hazards, their existing technologies -- largely developed in more benign environments -- often prove incapable of responding adequately to the new challenges.  And when disasters occur, as is increasingly likely, the resulting environmental damage is sure to prove exponentially more devastating than anything experienced in the industrial annals of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

The Deepwater Horizon operation was characteristic of this trend.  BP, the company which leased the rig and was overseeing the drilling effort, has for some years been in a rush to extract oil from ever greater depths in the Gulf of Mexico.  The well in question, known as Mississippi Canyon 252, was located in 5,000 feet of water, some 50 miles south of the Louisiana coastline; the well bore itself extended another 13,000 feet into the earth.  At depths this great, all work on the ocean floor has to be performed by remotely-controlled robotic devices overseen by technicians on the rig.  There was little margin for error to begin with, and no tolerance for the corner-cutting, penny-pinching, and lax oversight that appears to have characterized the Deepwater Horizon operation.  Once predictable problems did arise, it was, of course, impossible to send human troubleshooters one mile beneath the ocean’s surface to assess the situation and devise a solution.

Drilling in Alaska and the Arctic poses, if anything, even more perilous challenges, given the extreme environmental and climatic conditions to be dealt with.  Any drilling rigs deployed offshore in, say, Alaska’s Beaufort or Chukchi Seas must be hardened to withstand collisions with floating sea ice, a perennial danger, and capable of withstanding extreme temperatures and powerful storms.  In addition, in such hard-to-reach locations, BP-style oil spills, whether at sea or on land, will be even more difficult to deal with than in the Gulf.  In any such situation, an uncontrolled oil flow is likely to prove lethal to many species, endangered or otherwise, which have little tolerance for environmental hazards. 

The major energy firms insist that they have adopted ironclad safeguards against such perils, but the disaster in the Gulf has already made mockery of such claims, as does history.  In 2006, for instance, a poorly-maintained pipeline at a BP facility ruptured, spewing 267,000 gallons of crude oil over Alaska’s North Slope in an area frequented by migrating caribou.  (Because the spill occurred in winter, no caribou were present at the time and it was possible to scoop up the oil from surrounding snow banks; had it occurred in summer, the risk to the Caribou herds would have been substantial.) 

If It’s Oil, It’s Okay

Despite obvious hazards and dangers, as well as inadequate safety practices, a succession of administrations, including Barack Obama’s, have backed corporate strategies strongly favoring the exploitation of oil and gas reservoirs in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico and other environmentally sensitive areas. 

On the government’s side, this outlook was first fully articulated in the National Energy Policy (NEP) adopted by President George W. Bush on May 17, 2001.  Led by former Halliburton CEO Vice President Dick Cheney, the framers of the policy warned that the United States was becoming ever more dependent on imported energy, thereby endangering national security.  They called for increased reliance on domestic energy sources, especially oil and natural gas.  “A primary goal of the National Energy Policy is to add supply from diverse sources,” the document declared.  “This means domestic oil, gas, and coal.”

As the NEP made clear, however, the United States was running out of conventional, easily tapped reservoirs of oil and natural gas located on land or in shallow coastal waters.  “U.S. oil production is expected to decline over the next two decades, [while] demand for natural gas will most likely continue to outpace domestic production,” the document noted.  The only solution, it claimed, would be to increase exploitation of unconventional energy reserves -- oil and gas found in deep offshore areas of the Gulf of Mexico, the Outer Continental Shelf, Alaska, and the American Arctic, as well as in complex geological formations such as shale oil and gas.  “Producing oil and gas from geologically challenging areas while protecting the environment is important to Americans and to the future of our nation’s energy security,” the policy affirmed.  (The phrase in italics was evidently added by the White House to counter charges -- painfully accurate, as it turned out -- that the administration was unmindful of the environmental consequences of its energy policies.)

First and foremost among the NEP’s recommendations was the development of the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a proposal that generated intense media interest and produced widespread opposition from environmentalists.  Equally significant, however, was its call for increased exploration and drilling in the deep waters of the Gulf, as well as the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas off northern Alaska. 

While drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge was, in the end, blocked by Congress, an oil rush to exploit the other areas proceeded with little governmental opposition.  In fact, as has now become evident, the government’s deeply corrupted regulatory arm, the Minerals Management Service (MMS), has for years facilitated the awarding of leases for exploration and drilling in the Gulf of Mexico while systematically ignoring environmental regulations and concerns.  Common practice during the Bush years, this was not altered when Barack Obama took over the presidency.  Indeed, he gave his own stamp of approval to a potentially massive increase in offshore drilling when on March 30th -- three weeks before the Deepwater Horizon disaster -- he announced that vast areas of the Atlantic, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and Alaskan waters would be opened to oil and gas drilling for the first time. 

In addition to accelerating the development of the Gulf of Mexico, while overruling government scientists and other officials who warned of the dangers, the MMS also approved offshore drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas.  This happened despite strong opposition from environmentalists and native peoples who fear a risk to whales and other endangered species crucial to their way of life.  In October, for example, the MMS gave Shell Oil preliminary approval to conduct exploratory drilling on two offshore blocks in the Beaufort Sea.  Opponents of the plan have warned that any oil spills produced by such activities would pose a severe threat to endangered animals, but these concerns were, as usual, ignored.  (On April 30th, 10 days after the Gulf explosion, final approval of the plan was suddenly ordered withheld by President Obama, pending a review of offshore drilling activities.)

A BP Hall of Shame

The major energy firms have their own compelling reasons for a growing involvement in the exploitation of extreme energy options.  Each year, to prevent the value of their shares from falling, these companies must replace the oil extracted from their existing reservoirs with new reserves.  Most of the oil and gas basins in their traditional areas of supply have, however, been depleted, while many promising fields in the Middle East, Latin America, and the former Soviet Union are now under the exclusive control of state-owned national oil companies like Saudi Aramco, Mexico’s Pemex, and Venezuela’s PdVSA. 

This leaves the private firms, widely known as international oil companies (IOCs), with ever fewer areas in which to replenish their supplies.  They are now deeply involved in an ongoing oil rush in sub-Saharan Africa, where most countries still allow some participation by IOCs, but there they face dauntingly stiff competition from Chinese companies and other state-backed companies.  The only areas where they still have a virtually free hand are the Arctic, the Gulf of Mexico, the North Atlantic, and the North Sea.  Not surprisingly, this is where they are concentrating their efforts, whatever the dangers to us or to the planet.

Take BP.  Originally known as the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (later the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, still later British Petroleum), BP got its start in southwestern Iran, where it once enjoyed a monopoly on the production of crude petroleum.  In 1951, its Iranian holdings were nationalized by the democratic government of Mohammed Mossadeq.  The company returned to Iran in 1953, following a U.S.-backed coup that put the Shah in power, and was finally expelled again in 1979 following the Islamic Revolution.  The company still retains a significant foothold in oil-rich but unstable Nigeria, a former British colony, and in Azerbaijan.  However, since its takeover of Amoco (once the Standard Oil Company of Indiana) in 1998, BP has concentrated its energies on the exploitation of Alaskan reserves and tough-oil locations in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico and off the African coast. 

“Operating at the Energy Frontiers” is the title of BP’s Annual Review for 2009, which proudly began: “BP operates at the frontiers of the energy industry.  From deep beneath the ocean to complex refining environments, from remote tropical islands to next-generation biofuels -- a revitalized BP is driving greater efficiency, sustained momentum and business growth.” 

Within this mandate, moreover, the Gulf of Mexico held center stage.  “BP is the leading operator in the Gulf of Mexico,” the review asserted.  “We are the biggest producer, the leading resource holder and have the largest exploration acreage position… With new discoveries, successful start-ups, efficient operations, and a strong portfolio of new projects, we are exceptionally well placed to sustain our success in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico over the long run.”

Clearly, BP’s top executives believed that a rapid ramp-up in production in the Gulf was essential to the company’s long-term financial health (and indeed, only days after the Deepwater Horizon explosion, the company announced that it had made $6.1 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2010 alone).  To what degree BP’s corporate culture contributed to the Deepwater Horizon accident has yet to be determined.  There is, however, some indication that the company was in an unseemly rush to complete the cementing of the Mississippi Canyon 252 well -- a procedure that would cap it until the company was ready to undertake commercial extraction of the oil stored below.  It could then have moved the rig, rented from Transocean Ltd. at $500,000 per day, to another prospective drill site in search of yet more oil.

While BP may prove to be the principal villain in this case, other large energy firms -- egged on by the government and state officials -- are engaged in similar reckless drives to extract oil and natural gas from extreme environmental locations.  These companies and their government backers insist that, with proper precautions, it is safe to operate in these conditions, but the Deepwater Horizon incident shows that the more extreme the environment, the more unlikely such statements will prove accurate.

The Deepwater Horizon explosion, we assuredly will be told, was an unfortunate fluke: a confluence of improper management and faulty equipment.  With tightened oversight, it will be said, such accidents can be averted -- and so it will be safe to go back into the deep waters again and drill for oil a mile or more beneath the ocean’s surface. 

Don’t believe it.  While poor oversight and faulty equipment may have played a critical role in BP’s catastrophe in the Gulf, the ultimate source of the disaster is big oil’s compulsive drive to compensate for the decline in its conventional oil reserves by seeking supplies in inherently hazardous areas -- risks be damned. 

So long as this compulsion prevails, more such disasters will follow.  Bet on it.

Michael T. Klare is a professor of peace and world security studies at Hampshire College.  His most recent book is Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy.  A documentary movie version of his previous book, Blood and Oil, is available from the Media Education Foundation.

Copyright 2010 Michael T. Klare

Somalia: Pirates or protectors?

Andrew Mwangura

2010-05-20, Issue 482

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/features/64575

cc StewartThe hijacking of merchant ships by Somali pirates in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden has been widely condemned in UN resolutions and news reports, yet illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and the dumping of nuclear and toxic waste in Somali waters by foreign fleets continues to be ignored, writes Andrew Mwangura, in an overview of the origins and scale of piracy in the region.

The devastating Somali civil war since 1991 forced the Somali marine and fisheries sector to an abrupt collapse and almost all Somali fisheries activities shut down. The vessels of the Somali national fishing fleet were abducted and have never been returned. It is estimated that at least 200,000 people lost their jobs and the Somali fishing communities are still struggling to recover.

However, illegal fishing by foreign fleets and the more serious nuclear and toxic waste dumping from the industrialised world pose since then an environmental, socio-economic and ecological threat, which is unparalleled.

Very sophisticated factory-style fishing-vessels, which were designed for distant-water fishing and travel from faraway countries, whose harbours are thousands of miles away from Somalia and whose own fisheries resources are either under tight legal protection or already drastically overexploited, poured into the unprotected Somali waters.

They are in search of high-priced tuna, mackerel, swordfish, grouper, emperor, snapper, shark and of course the other valuable species in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden. With impunity they rob rock-lobster and shrimps for the tables of the wealthiest in this world, and dolphins, sea turtles and sea-cucumbers for the deranged tastes of the Far East. They have diminished the extraordinary population of dugong to near extinction.

Their task is solely oriented toward short-term gains, knowing the ecological limits, since Somalia does not only experience political but also resource displacement. Besides civil strife and outright war, the massive foreign fishing piracy, bringing criminal poaching and wanton destruction of the Somali marine resources for the last 19 years, may be one of the most damaging factors for the country, economically, environmentally and security-wise.

While biased UN resolutions, big power orders and news reports continue to condemn the hijackings of merchant ships by Somali pirates in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden, pirate fishing was and is ignored. Why are the UN resolutions, NATO orders and EU decrees to invade the Somali seas persistently failing to include the protection of the Somali marine resources from IUU violations in the same waters?

If a response to both piracy menaces would be balanced and fair, these condemnations would have been justified. But though the European Union (EU), Russia, Japan, India, Egypt and Yemen and others are all in on the anti-piracy campaign, they are only concentrating on the safety of merchant ships; at the same time, they cover up and protect their own illegal fishing activities.

Not only is this outrageous fishing piracy disregarded, but the illegal foreign marine poachers are being encouraged to continue their loot, as none of the current resolutions, orders and decrees refer to the blatant IUU fishing, which now continues unabated along the Somali coasts.

THE IUU MENACE AND FISH LAUNDERING PRACTICE

IUU (Illegal, unreported and unregulated) fishing is a serious global problem; it does not respect national boundaries or sovereignty, it puts unsustainable pressure on stocks, marine life and habitats; it undermines labour standards and distorts markets.

According to Mr Mohammed Waldo, a Somali specialist working with ECOTERRA International, IUU fishing is detrimental to the wider marine ecosystem because it flouts rules designed to protect the marine environment, which includes restrictions to harvest juveniles, closes spawning grounds and demands gear modification designed to minimise by-catch of non-target species. This negligence, he says, has impacted on the country in several ways – the given outright theft of an invaluable protein source from some of the world’s poorest people and the ruining of the livelihoods of almost all legitimate fishermen; incursions by trawlers into the inshore areas reserved for artisanal fishing; risk of collision with local fishing boats; destruction of fishing gear and deaths of fishermen.

It is estimated that the worldwide value of IUU catches stands at US$4 to $9 billion, with a large part of it from sub-Sahara Africa, particularly Somalia; IUU activities practice fish-catch laundering through mother-ship factories, uncontrolled transshipment and re-supply at sea. With these means allowing vessels to remain at sea for months, refuelling, re-supplying and rotating their crew, IUU fishing vessels never need to enter ports because they transfer their catches onto transport ships.

Illegally caught fish and other marine products are laundered by mixing the loot with legally caught fish on board of the transport vessels. Fish-catch laundering, which generates hundreds of millions dollars in the black market, is no less criminal than money laundering, but is not yet punished. Sea ports used for Somali fish laundering includes harbours in the Seychelles, Mauritius, Kenya (Kiunga, Mombasa) and the Maldives.

As the EU closed much of its fishing grounds for five to 15 years to allow for fish regeneration, as Asia overfished its seas, as the international demand for nutritious marine products increased and as the fears of a worldwide food shortage grew, the rich, uncontrolled and unprotected Somali seas became the target of the illegal fishing fleets of many nations.

Surveys by UN, Russian and Spanish assessors just before the collapse of the President Barre regime in 1991 estimated that at least 200,000 tons of fish per year could be harvested sustainably by both artisanal and industrial fisheries, but this has now become the looting target of the international fishing racket. Australian scientists put this figure to at least 300,000 tons.

THE ORIGIN OF SOMALI SEA PIRACY

Mr Waldo, who keeps a close watch of his country, traces the origin of sea piracy and pirate fishing in Somalia back to 1991 when the Siad Barre regime fell, resulting into the disintegration of the Somali navy and coastguard services.

‘Following severe draughts in 1973/74 and 1986, tens of thousands of nomads, whose livestock were wiped out by the draughts, were re-settled along the villages on the long, 3,300 km Somali coast,’ says the analyst. The resettled groups were developed into large fishing communities whose livelihoods depended mainly on inshore fishing, as well as the processing of the offshore catch.

From the early beginnings of the civil war in Somalia (as early as 1988) illegal fishing trawlers started to trespass and fish in Somali waters, including in the 12-nautical mile inshore artisanal fishing waters. The poaching vessels encroached on the local fishermen’s grounds, competing for the abundant rock-lobster and high value pelagic fish in the warm, up-swelling 60km deep shelf along the tip of the Horn of Africa.

ECOTERRA International and Waldo describe the deadly events that were to follow in the war torn country thus: ‘The piracy war between local fishermen and the IUU ventures started here. Local fishermen documented cases of trawlers pouring boiling water on the fishermen in canoes, their nets cut or destroyed, smaller boats crushed, killing all the occupants, and other abuses suffered as they tried to protect their national fishing turf.’ ECOTERRA International has many well documented cases that fishing nets provided by the emergency funds from the international community to ease the disaster of 1992/3 were wiped from the coast by foreign trawlers just days after they were provided to the impoverished fishing communities of Somalia.

Later, the fishermen armed themselves. In response, many of the foreign fishing vessels armed themselves too and with more sophisticated weapons and began to overpower the Somali fishermen again. It was only a matter of time before the local fishermen reviewed their tactics and modernised their hardware. This escalation and cycle of warfare has been going on from 1991 to the present. It is now developing into fully a fledged, two-pronged illegal fishing and sea piracy conflicts, which in addition soon will become politicised and radicalised if nothing stops the foreign impact.

According to the High Seas Task Force (HSTF), there were over 800 IUU fishing vessels in Somali waters at one time in 2005, taking advantage of Somalia’s inability to police and control its own waters and fishing grounds. The fish-poachers, which are estimated take out more than US$450 million in fish value from Somalia annually, neither compensate the local fishermen nor pay taxes and royalties and they do not respect any management, conservation and environmental regulations – norms associated with regulated fishing.

It is believed that the IUU fish-catch by vessels linked to the EU alone takes out of the country more than five times its aid to Somalia.

Illegal foreign fishing trawlers which have been fishing in Somalia since 1991 are mostly owned by EU and Asian fishing companies – Italy, France, Spain, Greece, Russia, Britain, Ukraine, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India – as well as Yemen, Egypt and Kenya among others.

Illegal vessels captured at the Somali coast by Somali vigilant groups during the years from 1991 to 2009 included Taiwanese trawlers Yue Fa No. 3 and Chian Yuein No. 232, FV Shuen Kuo No. 11; FV Airone, FV De Giosa Giuseppe and FV Antonietta Madre – three Italian vessels registered in Italy; FV Bahari Hindi –Kenyan-registered but owned and managed by Marship Co. of Mombasa., Russian-owned Gorizont-1 and Gorizont-2, Chinese-owned Tianyu No. 8 and Korean-owned Dong Wong 168, Korean-owned FV Beira 3, FV Beira 7 and FV Maputo 9, Greek owned GRECO 1 and GRECO 2, Spanish fishing boats Alakrana and Playa de Bakio, Taiwanese fishing boat Win Far 161, Egyptian fishing boats Ahmed Samar and Momtaz-1 among many others.

A number of Italian-registered SHIFCO vessels, Korean and Ukrainian trawlers, Indian, Egyptian and Yemeni boats were also captured by the said vigilant groups and fines of different levels paid for their release by their criminal owners.

Many Spanish seiners, frequent violators of the Somali fishing grounds, managed to evade capture at various times. The Basque fishing fleet is specifically cunning and now well armed. At least 19 Kenya trawlers have been illegally fishing along the Somali territorial waters, contrary to the UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) and the FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) instruments.

Waldo, the Somali analyst, says that following the collapse of Somali government in 1991, arrangements with Somali warlords and mafia-like companies were formed abroad for bogus fishing licensing purposes. He points out that jointly owned mafia-like Somali-European companies set up in Europe and Arabia worked closely with Somali warlords who issued fake fishing ‘licenses’ to virtually any foreign fishing pirate willing to plunder the Somali marine resources.

The UK and Italy-based African and Middle East Trading Co. (AFMET), PALMERA and UAE-based SAMICO companies are singled out as some of the most corrupt groups, issuing counterfeit licenses as well as fronting for the warlords who shared the loot.

Waldo avers that among technical advisors to the Mafia-like companies – AFMET, PALMIRA & SAMICO – were supposedly reputable firms like MacAllister Elliot & Partners of the UK, while warlords General Mohamed Farah Aidiid, General Mohamed Hersi Morgan, Osman Atto and ex-President Ali Mahdi Mohamed, who officially and in writing gave authority to AFMET to issue fishing ‘licenses’. Local fishermen and marine experts simply call this a ‘deal between thieves’. The analyst submits that AFMET alone ‘licensed’ 43 seiners (mostly Spanish) at US$30,000 per 4-month season. Spanish Pesca Nova was ‘licensed’ by AFMET while French Cobracaf group got theirs from SAMICO at a much discounted rate of US$15,000 per season per vessel.

In October 1999 the Puntland Administration gave carte blanche to yet another Mafia group known as PIDC, registered in Oman, to fish, issue licenses and to police the Puntland coast.

‘PIDC in turn contracted the UK based Hart Group International and together they pillaged the Somali fishing grounds with vengeance, making over US$20 million profit within two years,’ Waldo discloses.

The deal was to split the profits but PIDC failed to share the spoils with the people behind the Puntland administration, resulting in a revocation of their licenses.

Fisheries experts say that tuna catches in the South-Western Indian Ocean fell by as much as 30 per cent last year as pirates blocked access to some of the world's richest tuna waters off Somalia.

Reports indicate that, the Somali pirates threaten the tuna fishing industry, which is worth up to US$6 billion across the Indian Ocean region.

France and Spain, which both base fleets in the Seychelles, expected to haul nearly two-thirds of the year's catch off Somalia between August and November 2008. About 50 trawlers use Victoria port, through which up to 350,000 tonnes of tuna are handled each year. But catches have suffered for two consecutive years as stocks fall.

Seychellois fisheries experts say foreign currency earnings have fallen as a result of the dwindling tuna catch, hurting hopes for an economic recovery in the debt-laden archipelago. In the Seychelles, tuna and related industries – the re-export of fuel to vessels, port services, electricity and water for vessels – account for up to 40 per cent of the foreign exchange earned. The financial implications for the Seychelles are hard to assess, as the tuna fishing industry is shrouded in secrecy.

The Seychelles is paid per tonne of fish landed for port facilities – an important source of foreign exchange for the archipelago. Reduced catches mean fewer calls to port. From August to November, the waters of Somalia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (200 nautical miles (nm) EEZ) and beyond hold some of the planet's richest stocks of yellowfin tuna. 5 In 2006 there were hundreds of illegal fishing boats in Somali waters at any one time, mainly chasing tuna. Somali pirates turned to hijacking to stop the foreign fishing vessels destroying their marine resources as well as their small boats and equipment. In 2008 Somali pirates attacked tuna boats at least three times, leading to one ransom of over US$1 million.

The fines and ransoms earned then simply increased the appetite of criminal Somali groups for hunting other ships.

The notorious sea piracy of merchant ships is unlikely to be resolved without simultaneously attending to the fraudulent IUU fishing.

PIRACY INCIDENTS 2008/2009

As 2009 drew to close, it was clear that there is no end to Somali piracy and there is no end to the solutions being proposed. The total number of piracy attacks in the Gulf of Aden and the East coast of Somalia in 2009 overtook the figure for all of 2008, according to statistics from the IMB Piracy Reporting Centre. In 2008 there were 111 incidents, compared with 114 attempted attacks in 2009; of these attacks, there have been 42 successful hijackings in 2009 compared with the 142 vessels hijacked 2008.

However, 2009 saw a surge in activity off the east coast of Somalia, with 43 attacks by December 2009 compared to 19 in the whole of 2008.There was also an increase in the number of vessels fired at in these regions, from 39 instances in 2008, to 54 cases by December. In addition, the number of crew-members taken hostage is set to rise if the trend continues. In 2008 a total of 815 crew members were held captive, while the total number of hostages taken in these regions during 2009 already stands at 753.

A total of 32 vessels were hijacked by Somali pirates in the first nine months of 2009, with 533 crew members taken hostage. A further 86 vessels were fired upon and as of 1 December 2009, 14 vessels with over 275 crew held hostage, were still under negotiation. Nigeria remains another area of high concern. While only 20 attacks were officially reported to IMB in 2009, information received from other sources indicates that at least 50 per cent of attacks on vessels, mostly related to the oil industry, have gone unreported.

A list of recent piracy incidents and negotations appears at the foot of this article.

SEAFARERS’ WELFARE

When acts of piracy occur, the public attention is mainly focused on the heinous manner of the attackers and on the question of how the hijack will be resolved. The ship owners on their part are mostly concerned with the means of rescuing the crew, the vessel and the cargo.

Therefore the concern and the anxiety of many abruptly ends the moment the vessel is successfully rescued or simply released. But we forget that the end of hijack ordeal is to crew members the start of traumatic nightmares that they may live with for the rest of their lives.

The question is: Are the world, the shipping industry and the welfare lobbies giving enough attention to the plight of seafarers who happen to fall into the hands of pirates? Sadly NO! The following are some of the challenges facing such crew:

(a) The after effects of attacks on the mariners
(b) The frequent abandonment of many of the hostages and the ships by the ship owners
(c) The neglecting of the affected seafarers by some ship operators and flag states in terms of wages and benefits.

All stakeholders should seriously reflect on these issues as well as the psychological needs of these unfortunate seafarers.

For instance there is no logic at all for denying the seafarers their entire pay and benefits for period they remained captive.

I would also expect that the seafarers’ families should be briefed and provided for whenever a pirate attack or hostage taking occurs. The seafarers and families members need constant assurance about ongoing efforts being made to have them released while in the meantime their families should be given financial support.

The seafarers should have a long-term medical care long after surviving a pirate attack; traumatic events like being held hostage affect different people in different ways. Some conditions resulting from a pirate attack may manifest significantly later, hence provisions should exist to address these situations.

It is worrying to see that there is very little data on what happens to seafarers after they have endured a pirate attack. Some of them definitely continue working; others might opt out of the profession following the ordeal, while others might take a break for some time to recover.

The fact that there is no data on survivors of pirate attacks is a clear pointer to a lack of concern for them; this scenario should change. There have been several studies that have looked into effects of traumatic events on police, fire-fighters, military persons, and others, yet little literature exists on the psychological effects of the hostage-taking of the seafarers and specifically on the aspects of piracy.

In the light of this, there is a great need for players in the industry and welfare groups with means to carry out a clinical study of the psychological impact of pirate attacks on seafarers. The study should take into account the unique nature of seafaring including its multicultural nature.

The results of such a study will help determine how best to care for seafarers who have survived a pirate attack.

Truly the International Maritime Organization and the industry’s guidelines exist for preventing and suppressing pirates. But the same lack guidelines for caring for seafarers who have survived a pirate attack, other than guidance for debriefing seafarers for military or prosecutorial purposes.

Some shipping companies have provided an extensive array of studies and care for their crews following a piracy incident, which is very encouraging. Lessons from such shipping companies on the care of the crew can greatly assist in the process of preparing harmonised international guidelines.

HAZARDOUS WASTE DUMPING

Another major problem closely connected with the IUU fishing is industrial, toxic and nuclear waste dumping in both offshore and onshore areas of Somalia. Somali fishermen in various regions of the country have for a very long time complained to the international community about waste dumping and other ecological disasters.

These crises of waste dumping, warlords/mafia deals and the loud complaints of the Somali fishing community and civil society have been known to UN agencies and international organisations all along since the late 1980s, when Mustafa Tolba, then UNEP director general, helped ecologists not to be targeted by the dumping mafia, by not revealing the sources of thorough investigations of cases, where murder was implicit.

The UN agencies and organisations, which have been fully aware of these crises, often expressed concern and lamentations, but – except for Mustafa Tolba – never took any positive action against these criminal activities.

Waldo feels that the UN agencies apparently failed to inform the UN Security Council of this tragedy before it passed its resolutions 1816,1815,1814,1846 and 1838 and 1851 on sea piracy in the years up to 2008. It must be noted that there is no mention of the illegal fishing piracy, hazardous waste dumping or the plight of the Somali fishermen in any of these UN Security Council resolutions.

The threat of toxic waste dumping, pirate fishing by foreign vessels and over-fishing of Somali stocks could adversely, and perhaps permanently, affect the ecosystem of the entire region. Due to non-policing of Somali waters, many foreign vessels indiscriminately pollute by dumping hazardous waste in the waters of the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. European nations have been dumping toxic waste and radio-active medical waste into offshore Somali waters now for several years.

Those identified as perpetrators include an Italian firm (Progresso) and a Swiss firm (Achair Partners) but there are many others and numerous unidentified cases.

These cases were ‘justified’ by the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) recently, by saying that these firms had supposedly entered into contracts with Somali government officials to dump into the Somali waters, but it is obvious that no Somali can negotiate a hazardous waste disposal contract within the country’s sovereign borders in the midst of war and instability.

Achair Partners and Progresso were set up specifically as fictitious companies by larger industrial firms to dispose of hazardous waste. These are violations of international treaties in the export of hazardous waste to another country, in particular like Somalia.

Reports indicate that every month a number of local people die or suffer from the effects of such dumping within the coastal communities. For instance, at Eel-Dheer district of Galgadud region in central Somalia, dark blue long barrels were washed ashore in April 1992, which turned out to Be filled with an oily liquid.

When samples were taken from them and investigated, the analysis indicated that they contained deadly nuclear waste. Similar incidents happened at Adale district in 1996.

In 1998, a massive fish die-off was recorded, affecting all fish species, which were washed ashore in large quantities along the coastline from Mogadishu to Warsheekh – a coastal stretch of 45km. Fish and humans dying are all consequences of the hazardous waste dumping in Somali waters. All over the world, countries have policies to deal with such events, but in Somalia – the country with the longest coastline of any African nation – it is unfortunate that there is no basic strategy to deal with these matters. Somalia currently has no provision to deal with potential oil spills or other marine disasters and has no capability to monitor and control her coastal waters and, if necessary, provide sea search or rescue operations.

Somalia is recognised as one of the five richest fishing zones of the world and previously unexploited. It is now being ravaged and poisoned, unchecked by any authority, and if it continues to be fished at the level it is at present, fish stocks are in danger of being depleted. Secondly, the Somali people are being denied any income from this resource due to their inability to properly license and police the zone and the UN as well as the naval armada is turning a blind eye to the activities of illegal foreign fishing vessels whose operators are criminals from their home countries. In any other circumstance the persecution and punishment of the illegal dumpers and poachers would be enforced by the international courts of law – but Somalia is left to be a free for all and to die.

Justice and fairness have been overlooked in these twin problems of pirate fishing and sea piracy.

It is likewise disturbing to hear that President Issaia Afeworki of Eritrea and President Berlusconi of Italy secretly passed an agreement in 2005 so that Italy could dump 136 tonnes of nuclear waste in Eritrea in exchange for US$12 million. It is reported that the extremely dangerous material was dumped in Edage and Twalet in Massawa region. It is also disheartening to realise that even Iran has dumped 680 tonnes of wastes in Eritrea, in exchange for oil and money.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The EU, NATO, Chinese, Russian and US Navies can, of course, annihilate and obliterate the fishermen-turned-pirates and their supporting coastal communities – but that would be an illegal, criminal act.

Though it may temporarily reduce the intensity of the sea piracy, it would not result in a long-term solution for the problem.

The risk of loss of life of foreign crews and the impact of a major oil spill would be a ecological catastrophe of gigantic proportions for the whole coastal regions of East Africa and the Gulf of Aden.

In their current operations, the Somali fishermen pirates genuinely believe that they are protecting their fishing grounds (both 200-mile territorial and EEZ waters). They also feel that they are exacting justice and compensation for the marine resources stolen and the destroyed ecosystem by the IUUs. And their thinking is shared and fully supported by the coastal communities, whose protectors and providers they became.

The matter needs careful review and better understanding of the local environment. The piracy is based on local problems and it requires a number of comprehensive joint local and external partner’s approaches.

Firstly, the practical and lasting solution lies in jointly addressing the twin problems of the sea piracy and the pirate fishing, the root cause of the crisis.

Secondly, the national institutional crisis should be reviewed along with the piracy issues.

Thirdly, local institutions should be involved and supported, particularly by helping them to form coastguards, the provision of training and coastguard facilities. These may sound like asking too much of the UN agencies. But we should ask what it means to those who paid tens of millions dollars of ransom and to their loved ones held hostage for months.

Fourthly, a joint Somali and UN oversight agency – like at present the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) does it for the Somali airspace – should be considered for the Somali waters. The problem of piracy will not be completely eradicated unless there is a restoration of stability on the ground and there are effective institutions and structures in Somalia that can address the piracy issue in its totality.

ACTIONS NEEDED

– Immediate action by the international armada of navies against illegal dumping and illegal fishing in and around the Somali waters
– Revision of Somali fisheries and environmental protection legislation and institutions
– Strengthening decentralised governance and legal structures in Somalia
– Enlisting the support of influential Somali political, business and civic groups
– Rehabilitation and development of infrastructure in Somali coastal communities
– Development of coastal income generation possibilities and the fishing industry in Somalia
– Development of a national legislation on piracy for all Somalia
– Establishment of Somali Law Enforcement Authorities (navy, coastguard)
– Support of the pastoralists and proper range management in Somalia
– Eliminating the illegal arms trade and human trafficking from, to and through Somalia
– Establishment of a regional action plan against IUU fishing and dumping of toxic or nuclear waste
– Establishment of RCICPs (Regional coordination and information centre on piracy).

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

- Factsheet on Somali Piracy [PDF]
- 2010 All hijackings in Gulf of Aden and in the West Indian Ocean [PDF]
- 2010 hijackings by vessel type and state [PDF]
- For a list of recent hijackings and negotiations in 2009/10, please see the notes at the foot of this article.

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Andrew Mwangura runs the East African Seafarers’ Assistance Programme.
* Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at Pambazuka News.

NOTES

RECENT CASES IN NEGOTIATION

FV WIN FAR 161: The Taiwanese fishing vessel was seized on 6 April 2009 near the Seychelles. She is said to have been observed earlier fishing illegally in Somali waters. After the sea-jacking, it had been involved in the attack on MV ALABAMA and is now still moored about 7nm from Garacad at the north-eastern Indian Ocean coast.

The crew of 30 (17 Filipinos, six Indonesians, five Chinese and two Taiwanese) is still together and on board, but in awful condition. The ship's skipper and first engineer are Taiwanese nationals and the 700-ton long-liner is owned by a Taiwanese company, which regularly sent their vessels into Somali waters from the Seychelles – a key transshipment point for poached tuna from the Indian Ocean to Japan. The Government of the Philippines seems to be pretty helpless to even find the manning agency, which lured the 17 Pinoy sailors into the fish-poaching operation. Naval fire damaged the vessel, but it is said to still be able to sail. It was moored on three heavy anchor obtained from another, former sea-jack hostage – the MV Hansa Stavanger – near Garacad. The vessel was freed on 11 February 2010.

MV ARIANA: Seized 2 May 2009. The Ariana was seized north of Madagascar, en route to the Middle East from Brazil laden with soy-beans. The 24-strong all-Ukrainian crew has run low in food and water. The ship, flying a Maltese flag, belongs to All Oceans Shipping in Greece, which fronts for a British conglomerate. So far the shipping company has not responded to calls for urgently required medical attention. Two female sailors are on board, one of them in serious condition. The vessel received some fuel from MV KOTA WAJAR and is at the moment held close to it north of Hobyo. The Ukrainian Human Rights ombudswoman had appealed to her European counterpart in order to achieve immediate relief to the suffering of the crew-members, who have run out of food and clean water. Promises by the Ukrainian government to facilitate the offered evacuation of two female sailors, one of whom was in a life-threatening medical condition and still would require to be flown out, were broken. The vessel and crew were held near Hobyo at the Central Somali Indian Ocean coast, and freed on 10 December 2009.

MV CHARELLE: Seized on 12 June 2009. The relatively small 2,800-tonne general cargo ship carrying mostly empty containers was captured 60 miles south of Oman. The Antigua and Barbuda flagged vessel is owned by shipping firm Tarmstedt International and operated from New Zealand. Seven of the 10-member crew are Sri Lankans, three are Filipinos. The New Zealand shipping company, who owns the vessel, confirmed that negotiations for the release of MV CHARELLE had broken down, because the sea-shifta did not honour the reached agreement and negotiations had to start all over again. The new negotiations reached final agreement on 3 December and the ill-fated ship was released and sailed out to safe waters at 17:00hrs on the material day.

MV KOTA WAJAR: Seized on 15 October 2009. The 24,637-tonne container ship, seized 300nm north of Seychelles, was heading for the Kenyan port of Mombasa from Singapore. It has a multinational 21-man crew on board, of which two are Singaporean, five Sri Lankan and four Indian. It was used to lift a sea-jacked British couple, John and Rachel Chandler from their 38-ft yacht S/Y LYNN RIVAL, seized 22 October 2009 en route to Tanzania and later recovered by a UK naval ship. The ship was released on 28 December 2009.

MV DE XIN HAI: Seized on 19 October 2009. The 76,000 tonne Chinese bulk carrier with 25 Chinese sailors was en route from South Africa; it was carrying about 76,000 tonnes of coal and there were 25 Chinese crew aboard when it was hijacked in the Indian Ocean 550nm northeast of the Seychelles and 700nm off the east coast of Somalia. The bulker is owned by the state-owned Qingdao Ocean Shipping Co. Negotiations for the release seem not to have started in earnest, though the Chinese Shipowners' Association secretary general Zhang Zuyue confirmed that the Chinese side was willing to pay a ransom. The vessel was freed on 28 December 2009.

MV AL KHALIQ: Seized on 22 October 2009. The Panamanian-flagged 22,000 dwt bulker was abducted around180 miles west of the Seychelles . The crew consists of 24 Indian sailors and two Burmese nationals. EU NAVFOR patrol aircraft confirmed the hijacking, with six pirates seen on board and two skiffs in tow. A third, the 'mother ship' had apparently already been winched onto the ship's deck. The vessel with over 35,000 metric tonnes of wheat grain is now moored near Harardheere and the crew is on board.

FV THAI UNION 3: Seized on 29 October 2009. Pirates on two skiffs boarded the tuna fishing boat with a crew of 23 Russians, two Filipinos and two nationals from Ghana about 200 nautical miles north of the Seychelles and 650 miles off the Somali coast. During the attack the Russian captain was shot in the left elbow. The Russian and US navies tried to provide medical aid to the captain, while the captors themselves took him to hospital, had him treated and returned him to the vessel. The fishing vessel and its crew are held just around 1.5nm to where the Spanish fishing vessel FV ALAKRANA was held, near Harardheere at the central Somali coast.

SHAXAR: A Somali militia seized overnight on 30 October 2009 a Yemeni fishing Vessel – crew members are composed of four Yemenis and 6 Indians – in the Indian Ocean after a gun battle, in which at least one Somali was killed and another one wounded. The government of Yemen has confirmed the abduction.

MV DELVINA: Seized on 5 November 2009. The 53,629 dwt bulk carrier had a 21-man crew, consisting of seven Ukrainian officers and 14 Filipino sailors. The vessel was seized 250nm northwest of Madagascar and was laden with wheat. It arrived near Harardheere at the central Somali coast, The ship was released on 17 December.

AL HILAL: Seized before 9 November 2009 near Ras Hafun while having engine troubles. The white-coloured fishing vessel was said to be of Libyan origin, but it was neither found in the regular ship register nor in the list of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission. A Yemeni connection was also reported.

The vessel was then stranded on 9 November 2009 at a place called Diin Kudhac, from where the crew was brought on land and to Eyl. It was reported that the vessel was completely looted, including the engine and would most likely never sail again. The crew – consisting of sailors from India and Bangladesh – was split up by around 14 captors. Negotiations for their safe release started, while some of the Indian sailors went on hunger strike. The crew members of this vessel were released on 18 November 2009 but were held in Punt land awaiting repatriation back home.

MV FILITSA: Seized on 10 November 2009. The 1996-built, 23,709 dwt cargo-ship had a crew of 22, including three Greek officers and 19 Filipinos. The Marshall Islands-flagged ship had been heading from Kuwait to Durban in South Africa when it was attacked 513nm north east of the Seychelles as it was sailing from Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to the port of Durban in South Africa loaded with fertiliser. The ship, which belongs to the Order Shipping Co. Ltd, was released on 2 February 2010.

MV THERESA VIII: MV Theresa VIII, with a North Korean crew of 28, was seized on 16 November 2009 while en route to Mombasa from Indonesia laden with palm oil. The captain, who fired flares during the attack, was injured so badly by gunfire that he died one day later. story circulated by some media that he was taken ashore to receive medical attention is wrong, since the vessel by that time had not yet arrived at the coast. The tanker was released on 16 March 2010.

VLCC MARAN CENTAURUS: The Greek flagged super tanker was taken on 29 November 2009 afternoon some 585nm north east of Seychelles while under way to New Orleans from Jeddah. Crew members on board were composed of nine Greeks, 16 Filipinos, two Ukrainians and a Romanian. The tanker, owned and managed by a Greek shipping company, was freed on 18 January 2010.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Janelle Monae Performs “Tightrope” On The Late Show With David Letterman (Video)

May 19, 2010 by Verse  
Filed under TV

7 Comments

Janelle Monáe made her network debut appearance last night on the Late Show With David Letterman with an A-MAZ-ING performance of her single “Tightrope” taken from her album The Archandroid which is out in America now and will be available in the UK in July.

[Source]

SoulCulture TV x Janelle Monae: The Meaning Of ‘Tightrope’

“I represent for the have-nots…
I don’t think that I make music for Kings and Queens.”

“‘Tightrope’ was made for the people,” says Janelle Monae of the lead single from her forthcoming new album, The Arch Android. Featuring Big Boi from Outkast, the ‘Tightrope’ video depicts dance as rebellious freedom.

“Every time you step outside you’re dealing with life and you’re trying to stay sane, for a lack of better words. Balance, to me, is the key; not getting too high, not getting too low – that’s what ‘Tightrope’ represents. It’s like life’s tutorial on how to actually make it through life without becoming insane and driving yourself to a life full of hatred and just not wanting to be here.”

“Early on I realised that I have to stay balanced; not getting too high off praises and not getting too low off opinions and critiques that just don’t serve me well.”

Teamafrogrooves — February 19, 2010 — EXTRAIT DU NOUVEL ALBUM D'AK SANG GRAVE (2010) AK SANG GRAVE IS BACK Le groupe ak sang grave est né en 1996. A l'origine il était constitué de trois jeunes camerounais issus de la capitale.

CAMEROUN, WEST AFRICA

Hidden River Arts

-->

William Van Wert Fiction Award

• Printable Version
• Set a Reminder

• Google Calendar

Deadline:

June 30, 2010

Entry Fee:

$15

Web site:

www.hiddenriverarts.com

E-mail address:

hiddenriverarts@gmail.com

A prize of $1,000 and publication in Hidden River Review is given annually for a short story or novel excerpt. Send a manuscript of up to 25 pages with a $15 entry fee by June 30. Visit the Web site for the required entry form and complete guidelines.

Hidden River Arts, William Van Wert Fiction Award, P.O. Box 421, Bala-Cynwyd, PA 19004-0421.

The Vilcek Prize For Creative Promise in Literature

The Vilcek Foundation shall award a prize of $25,000 to a foreign-born writer who demonstrates outstanding early achievement. In addition, four finalists will receive awards of $5,000 each.

Four categories of writers are eligible to apply:

• Poets
• Novelists
• Short Fiction Writers
• Short Creative Nonfiction Writers

Applications for the Vilcek Prize for Creative Promise in Literature must be submitted online by clicking on the link below.

ELIGIBILITY

To be eligible for the Vilcek Prize for Creative Promise in the Arts and Humanities, applicants must meet all of the criteria listed below.

Applicant must have been born outside the United States.

Applicant must not be more than 38 years old as of December 31, 2010 (born on or after January 1, 1972).

Applicant must be a naturalized citizen or permanent resident (green card holder) of the United States.

Applicant must intend to pursue a professional career in the United States.

Applicant must be the individual who has authored the submitted work.

SELECTION PROCESS

A panel of distinguished members of the literary community will evaluate each application based on its quality, the level of creativity, clarity of vision, impact and the individual’s ability to present his/her work in a professional manner.

The prize winner selected by the jury will be a candidate whose work best exemplifies the characteristics indicated above. Additionally, the jury will identify four finalists, each of whom will receive an award of $5,000. Recommendations of the jury will be submitted to the Vilcek Foundation’s Board of Directors for final approval.

The winner will be notified in November 2010 and will be invited to attend an awards ceremony in New York City in the spring of 2011. Travel expenses and accommodations will be covered by the Vilcek Foundation.

APPLY –
> APPLICATION GUIDELINES
> APPLY ONLINE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Towson Prize for Literature

The Alice and Franklin Cooley Endowment

Established in 1979 with a grant from Alice and Franklin Cooley, the Towson University Prize for Literature is awarded annually for a single book or book-length manuscript of fiction, poetry, drama or imaginative non-fiction by a Maryland writer. The $1,000 prize is granted on the basis of literary and aesthetic excellence as determined by a panel of distinguished judges appointed by the university. The first award, made in the fall of 1980, went to novelist Anne Tyler.

Dr. Franklin Cooley was a noted medievalist and bibliophile. A native Marylander, he was associated with the University of Maryland and Johns Hopkins University, both as a student and a teacher, over a period of 40 years. He earned his bachelor's and doctoral degrees at Hopkins and his master's at Maryland. Except for a three-year period of teaching at Hopkins during the course of his doctoral studies, he spent most of his career specializing in medieval literature at Maryland, where he was named professor emeritus upon his retirement. Dr. Cooley died in 1989; Alice Cooley died in 1997.

Dr. Franklin and Mrs. Alice Cooley have been benefactors of Towson University since 1974. They established an endowment for the acquisition and care of books, journals and records in 20th century English and American poetry, and donated their extensive collection of modern poetry to the university's Cook Library. They also established an endowed scholarship for the fine arts and con­tributed generously to the College of Liberal Arts Endowment. The Towson University Prize for Literature is a gift designed to enhance the knowledge and appreciation of contemporary literature.

Rules

1. The prize shall be awarded on the basis of aesthetic and literary excellence for a single book or book-length manuscript of fiction, poetry, drama or imaginative non-fiction.

2. The work must have been published within the three years prior to the year of nomina­tion or must be scheduled for publication within the year in which nominated.  Self-published works will not be considered.

3. The author must have resided within the State of Maryland at least three years at the time of nomination and must be a resident of the State of Maryland at the time the prize is awarded. Verification of residence may be required.

4. The winning author must grant to Towson University the right to quote from the winning work in any publicity related to the prize.

5. Any individual, institution, group or publisher may nominate one or more works for the prize.

Panel of Judges

Organized by the English Department, Towson University

Click here to complete and print Nomination Form

Mailing of Entry

The applicant must submit three copies of each work, in bound form if it has been published and in typewritten, double-spaced manuscript form, if not. If a manuscript is submitted, a copy of the contract or the letter of acceptance from the publisher indicating the proposed date of publication must be enclosed. 

A completed nomination form must accompany each submission of three copies.

All submissions become the property of Towson University and will not be returned.

The deadline for submission of all materials is June 15.

Dr. Edwin Duncan, Chair

Department of English

Towson University

Towson, MD 21252-0001

Towson University is in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations that prohibit illegal discrimination. The university does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.

  

Hurston/Wright Writers' Week Requirements Workshops FAQ Sunday, July 25 – Saturday, July 31, 2010 Howard University, Washington, DC HurstoHurston/Wright Writers’ Week is the nation’s only multi-genre summer writer's workshop for writers of African descent. Since the first workshop in the summer of 1996, over 850 writers have attended the weeklong program of classes and presentations by publishers, agents, and writers. The Week brings together Black writers from around the United States, as well as Black writers from the Caribbean, Africa, and Europe, who create a nurturing, safe space to discuss their work, its meaning, and unique aesthetics. Hurston/Wright Writers’ week is distinguished by the diversity of the writers it attracts: published, unpublished, college students, seniors, retirees, professionals - all chosen to participate in the workshop on the strength of their writing. Perhaps the highest accolade given to the workshop is the number of participants who have returned to their communities, and inspired by Hurston/Wright Writers’ Week, have formed community workshops and support groups for Black writers.  Return to top Workshop Schedule: Sunday, July 25 check-in and orientation Monday, July 26 classes meet from 12:00pm – 3:00pm Tuesday, July 27 – Friday, July 30 classes meet from 9:00am – 12:00pm Saturday, July 31 check-out One-on-one sessions will be conducted by workshop leaders throughout the week. Panel discussions and readings by workshop leaders and participants will also be held throughout the week. Once accepted to the workshop participants will receive a detailed schedule. Return to top Admission The selection process for the Hurston/Wright Writers’ Week Workshop is competitive. In order to provide the highest quality instruction possible, class sizes are kept small. Therefore, we cannot accommodate ALL qualified writers.   HOW TO APPLY Complete application Email your manuscript to info@hurstonwright.org You may apply to only one workshop Submissions must be received by June 7, 2010. Submissions received after June 7 will be considered only if space is still available Letters of notification will be emailed to you by June 11. Manuscript Requirements: All manuscripts must be double spaced in 12 pt. font.   Workshop Requirements Building the Novel (Fiction) 20 - 30 pages of a novel manuscript Advanced Novel (Fiction) 50 – 60 pages of a completed or near completed novel manuscript Nonfiction 20 – 30 pages of a memoir, biography, or factual story Poetry 5 - 10 poems, not to exceed 20 pages Facility Howard University will be the host site for Hurston/Wright Writers’ Week Workshop. The university is located in Northwest, Washington, D.C. There are numerous monuments and museums, free concerts, and international dining, as well as many important African American cultural institutions close. Return to top Workshop Fees Base Tuition $575 Room & Board (double occupancy rooms) $250 Residence Meal Plan (includes breakfast, lunch & dinner) $160 Total Cost $985     Base Tuition $575 Commuters Meal Plan (includes lunch & dinner) $125 Total Cost $700     Advanced Tuition $650 Room & Board (double occupancy rooms) $250 Residence Meal Plan (includes breakfast, lunch & dinner) $160 Total Cost $1,060     Advanced Tuition $650 Commuters Meal Plan (includes lunch & dinner) $125 Total Cost $775       Payment Schedule A $100 non-refundable deposit must be paid by June 23, 2010 The full amount of fees due must be paid by July 9, 2010 Cancellation Policy: Deposit payments are non-refundable. If an applicant is unable to attend the workshop and notifies Hurston/Wright at least 2 weeks prior to the start of the workshop he or she can either receive a prorated refund or a course credit for the full amount to be used towards a future workshop. Return to top Published Workshop Alumni Michele Andrea Bowen: Second Sunday and Church Folk, Walk Worthy Press Carol Parrott Blue: The Dawn at My Back, University of Texas Press Karen E. Dabney: The Magic Pencil, Dabs and Company Anita Doreen Diggs: The Other Side of the Game, Dafina Books; A Mighty Love and A Meeting in the Ladies Room, Kensington Books Patricia Elam: Breathing Room, Simon and Schuster Dwight Fryer: E. Landon Hobgood: Songs of the Zodiac: In Doo-Wop America, Harlem Writers Guild E. Landon Hobgood: Songs of the Zodiac: In Doo-Wop America, Harlem Writers Guild A. Van Jordan: Quantum Lyrics, W.W. Norton & Company; Macnolia, W.W. Norton & Company; Rise, Tia Church Press/The Guild Crystal E. Wilkinson: Water Street and Blackberry, Blackberry, Toby Press Return to top Workshops Building the Novel (Fiction) A workshop designed for writers who have completed 75-100 pages of a novel, and who are familiar with the technical aspects of fiction writing. The course will be conducted as a workshop with in-depth critique and analysis of a selected portion of the manuscript, as well as discussion of the broader issues and challenges inherent in writing book-length fiction. Workshop Leader Tayari Jones is the author of Leaving Atlanta, published in 2003, which received many awards and accolades including the Hurston/Wright Award for Debut Fiction. Her second novel, The Untelling, published in 2005, won the Lillian C. Smith Award for New Voices. The Silver Girl, her highly anticipated third novel, is forthcoming from Algonquin Books. She was named as the 2008 Collins Fellow by the United States Artists Foundation. Currently, she is an Assistant Professor in the MFA program at Rutgers-Newark University. Return to top Advanced Novel This workshop is for advanced writers who have completed a novel manuscript or are near completion. The workshop will provide a close reading and discussion of up to 50 pages from the novel. In addition to technical aspects of the novel, issues such as how to end a novel, insuring thematic consistency, and turning personal experience into fiction will be addressed. Workshop Leader Marita Golden is author of ten books, her best-selling books include the memoirs Migrations of the Heart, Saving Our Sons and Don’t Play in the Sun: One Woman’s Journey Through the Color Complex as well as the novels Long Distance Life, The Edge of Heaven and most recently After, which won the Fiction Award from the Black Caucus of the American Library Association. She has taught writing at George Mason University, Virginia Commonwealth University and most recently served as Writer in Residence at the University of the District of Columbia. Return to top Nonfiction This workshop focuses on how to write a memoir, biography and factual story with an emphasis on research, oral history, and the use of vivid description that captures the urgency of the event(s) and the timelessness of its meaning. Workshop Leader Michael H. Cottman an award-winning journalist and author, is a Senior Correspondent for BlackAmericaWeb.com, a division of REACH Media/Radio One, the nation's largest black-owned media company. Cottman, the author of three books, has spent the past 27 years writing about politics, social trends, race, and America's expanding multi-cultural society. He also presently writes a political blog for Politics In Color. Return to top Poetry This workshop will focus on poetic structure as cinematic movement and will approach the poem as a visual art form. Through writing exercises and class discussions, on the use and power of imagery and metaphor students will learn how to intensify the emotional impact of poetry. This is a workshop where passion and empathy mingles and where one can tryout a new poem on trained and thoughtful ears. Workshop Leader A. Van Jordan is the author of Rise, published in 2001, which won the PEN/Oakland Josephine Miles Award. His second book, M-A-C-N-O-L-I-A, published in 2004, was awarded an Anisfield-Wolf Award. Jordan was also awarded a Whiting Writers’ Award in 2004 and a Pushcart Prize in 2006, 30th Edition. Quantum Lyrics was published July 2007. He is a recipient of a John Simon Guggenheim Fellowship, 2007, and a United States Artist Williams Fellowship, 2008. He is a Professor in the Dept. of English at the University of Michigan. Return to top FAQ What does the workshop cost? Base Tuition $575 Advanced Tuition $625 Where is the workshop going to be held? Howard University, Washington, DC How many people are in each course? Up to 12 students How many pages of my work am I supposed to submit? Requirements for manuscripts are controlled by the genre in which you are applying.  See Manuscript Requirements. When is the submission deadline? June 7, 2010 What is the registration fee? $15, paid via PayPal When is full tuition due? The full amount of fees due must be paid by July 9, 2010 When will I be notified of the status of my application? Letters of notification will be emailed to you by June 11.