Pirates and IR Theory

Bjoern H. Seibert's recent post "When great powers compete, the pirates win" on Foreign Policy's The Argument raises some interesting questions regarding the realist and liberal theories of international relations I've been studying in class the past few weeks. The recent hijacking of two European tankers in the Gulf of Aden leaves Seibert skeptical that international institutions are effectively at combating piracy (though others, including Vice Adm. William Gortney, commander of the US Naval Forces Central Command and head of the 5th Fleet Command in Bahrain, disagree). More than that, however, Seibert sees NATO and the EU as competing powers in the Gulf of Aden, writing that "[e]ach institution hopes to prove its superiority, and fighting piracy is a perfect stage." Seibert sees this rivalry as being inefficient and even counterproductive, to the extent that "contradictions are unavoidable."

What I found interesting was the way in which even effective cooperation within international institutions is subumed under an apparently realist rubric pitting international institutions -- rather that states -- against each other in a competition for relative power. The problem boils down to which of two apparently realist goals is more important: ending piracy or "win[ning] top honors for military strength" -- a goal that looks a lot like Jeffrey Taliaferro's concept of prestige.

Although Seibert prioritizes realist goals in this piece, he affords a place for liberal methods, making a brief appeal for a joint EU-NATO anti-piracy operation. Going a step farther, Robert Kaplan (in addition to recognizing the influence of popular romanticizations of piracy), writes that:

"The one upside of piracy is that it creates incentives for cooperation among navies of countries who often have tense relations with each other. The U.S. and the Russians cooperate off the Gulf of Aden, and we might begin to work with the Chinese and other navies off the coast of Indonesia, too. As a transnational threat tied to anarchy, piracy brings nations together, helping to form the new coalitions of the 21st century."

To bring in the constructivist perspective, it is also interesting to note that both organizations have deliberately chosen fighting piracy as a means to incease their prestige. This is by no means an arbitrary choice. As Seibert writes, "Each institution hopes to prove its superiority, and fighting piracy is a perfect stage. Who doesn't agree that the buccaneers should go?" John Boonstra of the UN Dispatch says that "fighting piracy is a crowd-pleaser for both alliances." (He also argues that the military focus on piracy undermines more liberal approaches: peace-making, capacity-building, and law-and-order-upholding).

Just why fighting piracy should prove so popular and legitimating is part of what we will be researching this summer.