| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The American call for commercial shippers to rely upon private security companies (PSCs) to protect their vessels from Somali pirates presents several challenges to sea users. Though this call for responsibilization inherently reveals state limitations, not all commercial shippers embrace it because it upsets traditional conceptions regarding order at sea. Also, the call's American origins suggest that the United States Navy may not work to ensure freedom of navigation in the last resort despite longstanding practice and the expectations of sea users. This, in turn, underscores the lack of structure in relations amongst states, shippers, and PSCs, which could have detrimental consequences regarding the management of violence at sea. The United States Navy may cease working to ensure freedom of navigation in the last resort despite longstanding practice and the expectations. While greater utilization of PSCs might seem to be an effective alternative and European states might add substance to the American call, perhaps through the Montreux Document, European activism is likely to be tempered by the different approaches towards private security that vary from country to country. PSC activism may affect the ability of navies to perform roles beyond the protection of commercial shipping.
|