More African pirates

[rov1200]

http://news.bbc.co.uk...ld/africa/8376715.stm

Does Africa need more aid when its quite capable of helping itself?

[jno]

Africa is quite a large place; it might be worthwhile to be more specific. In particular, I don't think the UK sends any aid to Benin, though I might be wrong.

[hc4361]

Africa is not a country, it is a continent of 53 countries. One African country is no more responsible for another African country than any other country in the world. It is thought those particular pirates are Nigerian, although that isn't confirmed.

[Gromit]

Let's see, Africa is home to 1 billion people. The attack on this ship off Benin did not make the pirates one penny.

I can see a basic flaw in your argument.

[birdie1971]

Clearly, there is a growing problem with piracy in some African states. I believe that rov1200 is asking, 'Should the world be helping those African countries blighted with piracy or should those African nations be dealing with it themselves'.

Correct me if I'm wrong rov1200.

Assuming I am correct in my interpretation of the question, I think that the answer is 'yes'.


Why?

Before I answer the (assumed) question, I want to say that I am unequivocally opposed to the continued incarceration of Paul and Rachel Chandler. If their captors have one ounce of humanity, they should release them immediately.

[birdie1971]

Continued....

I believe that the 'developed world' have to build a lot of bridges with certain African countries (if not all of them). Without going into entire volumes of history, the 'West' has exploited many African nations to quite an extraordinary extent. Looking at Somalia and the plight of their fishermen – western nations have been dumping toxic chemical waste into their watercourses for years – poisoning both the locals and the fish that used to thrive in them. This pollution has been both illegal and 'legal'. The illegal dumping can easily be imagined but the 'legal' dumping is practically the same – it's 'legal' because the country hasn't sufficiently legislated against massive multinationals tipping mercury into streams.

The bottom line though, is people's livelihood; in the UK, if you take someone's livelihood away from them, there is a safety net for them. When you take away the livelihood from someone without a safety net... people will go to extremes to provide for themselves and their families. If this means committing crime, then some people will resort to it. Most won't. But some will.

I'm not condoning their actions, but I can understand why they do it.

[rov1200]

Take Somalia:

"""The difficulties and risks of working in Somalia are rarely paralleled elsewhere. It is difficult and expensive to operate there, and to supervise relief operations adequately. The UK response is to work with international relief agencies that are most experienced in delivering results in difficult operating environments.

The overall goal of DFID’s programme is a peaceful, politically stable, and economically viable Somalia. The framework for Somalia has increased from £3m in 2002/ 03 to £30m in 2008/09."""

[Gromit]

The above is from

http://ukinkenya.fco....ith-kenya/development

What it is supposed to mean in relation to the original question, I have no idea.

Care to elaborate further rov1200?