How they exploit these resources can be problematic because these oceans offer a wide range of important resources – from fish to minerals and hydrocarbons – that are also crucial to the continent’s economy and food security.
But, in some countries, foreign interests dominate. For instance, the continent’s oil exploration, shipping, ports infrastructure, and industrial fishing sectors are sometimes dominated by foreign companies.
Angola’s oil production, for example, is dominated by the major international oil exploration and production companies including Total (France) with a 41% market share, Chevron (US) with 26%, Exxon Mobil (US) with 19%, and BP (UK) with 13%.
And so, despite these waters being vital to African countries and their citizens, foreign actors will act in a way that’s in their best interests - at times to the detriment of African countries and citizens.
One illustration of this relates to maritime (ocean) security. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) stipulates that coastal countries are responsible for managing the security of their territorial waters (up to 12 nautical miles from their shorelines) and that of their exclusive economic zones, between 12 and 200 nautical miles from their shoreline. This includes protection against unlawful acts at sea, such as illegal fishing, piracy and armed robbery, terrorism and other related crimes.
However, the same convention allows other countries to act, against piracy, for example, in the exclusive economic zones.
Drawing on our expertise on African maritime governance and security, we reviewed literature, databases of policy documents and maritime security reports, to explore how non-African countries selectively frame what constitutes threats. How these threats are framed determines the response to them and how those response are resourced. The effect is that it undermines a holistic notion of maritime security that would benefit the African people.
We argue that the focus by non-African countries is on piracy and armed robbery at sea which threaten resource extraction, transportation and safety. They hardly focus on the protection of Africa’s marine resources, in particular from pollution and illegal fishing caused by foreign powers.
This approach is illogical. It fails to recognise that there’s a link between deprivation and maritime crimes, including piracy and armed robbery at sea. African coastal communities, many of whom are already marginalised and deprived, are highly dependent on marine resources. The depletion of these resources only worsens their situation. Failure to prioritise the protection of African marine resources will push people further into poverty and continue the cycle of insecurity at sea.
A Guest Editorial