Okayy soo I don't understand what you are alluding to here Alex. What is important here is to look above and beyond who dumped and why, and realize that somewhere down the line an owner of a multi million dollar industry ratified the dumping of Toxic waste in Somalia. It is unneccesary to get muddled up in what happened in between, and what laws were broken and whether they werent broken at all and the waste was sold to a waste disposal company operating under the Mafia's name. The point is this waste ended up on the shores of a starving country because somewhere down the line $8 per tonne was obviously much more lucarative then $1000 for a company, its basic economics. The lower the costs higher the profits etc etc etc. Infact having taken environmental economics and done the abatement cost model, this ridiculously low cost East African solution must be like a "cheat code" for the companies!!
But is it worth it? “Most of the waste was simply dumped on remote beaches in containers and leaking disposable barrels.“ even if that is the case, what's the difference? If you do it on the shores of moghidasu or 100 miles down the road, its the sea a superfluous body. I'm not even sure what damage it did to the marine ecosystem, but the last I checked it's not positive.
Same with illegal fishing trawlers, I guess it would be correct that every country has its own rights under the international water laws, but it is unfair to exploit the anarchy.
As far as the dictators/warlords go, it is a Banana republic. They hardly last more then a few years, especially in Somalia, and aren't democratically elected by any streches of imagination. A deal with them doesnt legitimize any dumping, it only shows the corrupt nature of the Swiss/Italian organization. Legally it might be "legitimate" (I'm not sure if you were alluding to that) but morally not so much!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"According to the High Seas Task Force (HSTF), there were over 800 IUUs 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 IUUs, which are estimated take out more than $450 million in fish value out of Somalia annually, neither compensate the local fishermen, pay tax, royalties nor do they respect any conservation and environmental regulations – norms associated with regulated fishing. It is believed that IUUs from the EU alone take out of the country more than five times the value of its aid to Somalia every year."
"Somali fishermen in various regions of the country also complained to the international community about the illegal foreign fishing, stealing the livelihoods of poor fishermen, waste dumping and other ecological disasters, including the indiscriminate use of all prohibited methods of fishing: drift nets, under water explosives, killing all “endangered species” like sea-turtles, orca, sharks, baby whales, etc. as well as destroying reef, biomass and vital fish habitats in the sea (IRIN of March 9, 2006)."
"In a proposal for action to the UNDP for Somalia in early 1990s, Mr. John Laurence, a fishery consultant with PanOcena Resources Ltd, reports the catastrophic and heartbreaking illegal foreign exploitation of the Somali seas. “With regards to the controlled exploitation of the Somali deep sea fishing grounds by the huge foreign factory ships and vessels it is our opinion that the UN must get involved. This area is recognized as one of the 5 richest fishing zones of the world and previously unexploited. It is now being ravaged, unchecked by any authority, and if it continues to be fished at the level it is at present stocks are in danger of being depleted …. So, a world resource is under serious threat and the UN is sitting back doing nothing to prevent it”. “Secondly, the Somali people are being denied any income from this resource due to their inability to license and police the zone” and “ the UN is turning a blind eye to the activities of the fishing vessels whose operators are not paying their dues; which in any other circumstances would be enforced by any international court of law”, argues Laurence."
This clearly points out that one of the poorest countries in the world is being bullied over the only resource it has: Its rich marine life.
Source:
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/4/1...an_in_response
Also before the conservative bodies here take me the wrong way:
Does it
justify their actions? Not necessarily.
Does it help us
elucidate upon their motivations? Most definitely, and to ignore that fact is wholly obscene.
