Agustina Eugenia Castro

We have previously defined what that implies a Strategy for Maritime Security and its relevance to all countries, and their populations, in our globalized and complex world. This second policy brief provides the opportunity to introduce more details concept about the topic in question within a comparative approach. To do this, I decided to limit my field of research, five Strategies of Maritime safety and Security of my choice, which allows me to make more observations retailers and focusing the analysis on the focal points of the same. In short, it seeks to understand how different States think the Maritime Safety and, consequently, how the dealt with within their Strategies. And, on this basis, to establish similarities and differences throughout the writing, and subsequently draw conclusions. This is one of the great contributions and riches own comparisons. For that reason it is recommended to adopt this method of study in regards to the diverse international affairs, but it must not lose sight that it is a single method or tool among many others. Therefore, for an approach that is more full of international affairs, as are the maritime issues, it requires the articulation and complementarity of different methods of study that we can use.

I present here the cases of analysis chosen. I researched about the Strategy of Maritime Security New Zealand – Guardianship of Aotearoa, Te Kaitiakitanga or Tangaroa – in the year 2020. Also of 2020 was chosen as the Strategy of United States, Advantage at Sea – Prevailing with Integrated All-Domain Naval Power. For his part, turned to the Strategy of France entitled Stratégie National pour la mer et le littorallaunched in 2017. Also I found it interesting to address a regional strategy of a set of countries, so I chose the Strategy of the African Unionestablished in 2012, whose name is Africa's Integrated Maritime Strategy (or simply 2050 AIM Strategy). Finally, I thought of special relevance to analyze the Strategy of the country's naval excellence, United kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which is referred to as UK Maritime 2050 – Call for Evidence, Navigating the Future – established in 2018. All of them have unique aspects, but also certain points in common.

In terms of the methodology used, it should be noted that, in addition to presenting definitions and basic information about each Strategy, the comparisons are made on the basis of the concepts set out in the first policy brief. In other words, we return to the postulates of the expert Christian Buerger's disease who thought in the Strategies of Maritime Safety in relation to four key aspects: naval power, protection, or maritime security, blue economy and the resilience of human. This coincides with what is defined by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in which involves the “awareness of the maritime domain”, that is to say, “the effective understanding of anything associated with the maritime domain that could impact the security, safety, economy or the environment.”

In the first place, New Zealand understands that Safety at Sea “means to prevent, detect, mitigate, and respond to the risks arising from the maritime activity of human malicious, not regulated, negligent or harmful (or potentially harmful)”. The aim of the Strategy is to ensure that “New Zealand has a sector of maritime security can continue to ensure the economic interests, cultural and marine ecosystem (...) to future generations.” In the same Strategy ensures its breadth, conceptual and terminological, in order to consider interests and challenges both traditional and emerging. Then, the desired end state to achieve is a New Zealand safer and more prosperous, now and in the future.

Being a country with a strictly insular, it is vital to guarantee the maritime security of not only your costs, but its surrounding region in the South Pacific Ocean, given that they also maintain relations of domination and influence in territories such as the Cook Islands and Niue, and Tokelau. It stands out that, to achieve effective security in these areas, it is necessary to work closely with its allies in the Asia-Pacific region, such as Australia. New Zealand has more than 15 thousand kilometers of coastline and, in addition, there are more than a thousand kilometers that separates it from its closest neighbours. In other words, as it states, “the well-being of the country is linked to the health of the sea as a key regulator of the global climate and supplier of natural resources and critical minerals” and “prosperity depends on good management of the sea”. Just to mention another important fact, it is estimated that approximately 4 billion new zealand dollars to the gross domestic product of the country are derivatives of the maritime economy.

Specifically, the Strategy of Maritime Security new zealand is founded on four fundamental pillars for the sector of maritime security. First, it must be understand the maritime domain, relaying important information about the maritime activity at all times and innovative trends in the area, making the analysis relevant. Second, it seeks to establish relationships effective with national and international partners, on the basis of rules of diplomatic and military, to be able to manage joint and proactively risks, uniting the efforts of large number of players. Third, it is necessary to prevent and mitigate threats in the maritime domain, from the coordination of efforts, policies and processes established. Fourth, we must effectively and flexibly answer and take action to mitigate threats and consequential damages.

In turn, these four pillars are based on two important principles. On the one hand, the Strategy must be approached from a approach to multi-agency and understanding, inclusive of all relevant actors in the field, internal and external. And, on the other hand, it should be ensured “Kaitiakitanga or guardianship”, that is to say, the responsibility for the management of marine resourcesto ensure the sustainability of the marine ecosystem and the construction of a sustainable economy, always thinking about the future generations and their development.

Finally, desatacan several threats that it is necessary to mitigate, such as illegal activities in protected areas, illegal exploitation of natural resources, marine pollution, climate change, piracy and violence at sea, threats to ports, trade prohibited materials such as drugs, weapons and protected species, illegal immigration and organized crime, and transnational . All this is taken into account for the population of new zealand in general, but special attention is given to the coastal populations more vulnerable to this type of risk.

In the second place, the strategy of United States quite different from the other strategies and the parameters set by Buerger's disease. Although it does not provide a univocal definition of Maritime Security, critical reading of this Strategy is understood that it points directly to the power relations in the sea and to the resilience of human, leaving aside the other two aspects, or at least not given an explicit reference.

This Strategy was prepared jointly by the U. S. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard, that is to say, the Naval Service american in its entirety, presenting a unified view of the current challenges and to come, in addition to the line of action recommended to be implemented. It begins by asserting that “the united States is a maritime nation, whose security and prosperity depend on the seas”. In that line, it is stated that “the actions of the united States in this decade will determine the balance of sea power for the remainder of the century”, and that the security of the country depends on its “ability to maintain their advantage in the sea”, which is based on an international order-free and rules-based.

In that sense, this Strategy aims to give an overview of the current situation in the sea and, consequently, outline actions to ensure that the professionals of the Naval Service are at the height of the circumstances and challenges. To do this, it ensures that must be “prepared, trained and equipped for be able to prevail in the strategic competition of the long-term, win potential battles, and preserve the future peace” and the interests of the country. This is, then, the desired end state central north american Strategy.

In terms of the current diagnosis of maritime security, the united States does not hesitate to say, throughout this document, the international order today, maritime and general, is threatened by the actions of certain nations that tend to erode the balance of power. Put another way, the united States feels threatened their advantageous position in international maritime, which begins to be seen “eroded” by their “enemies, rivals” to whom you must defeat. You can here already made a difference in relation to the rest of the Strategies analyzed, more oriented to international cooperation by means of strategic alliances with other countries, and some similarity with the british Strategy, which also denotes traits competitive. The united states thinks its maritime policy in terms schmittianos “friend-enemy”. It was No surprise to analyze that the “enemies” maritime more threatening to this country are the Russian federation (Russia) and the people's Republic of China (China).

Along the Strategy is reiterated on multiple occasions, the impressive technological modernisation-military being developed by Russia and China, linked to aggressive actions on the part of those countries, so that alarm to the united States. Despite the fact that both are threat to american country and its alliesit notes that China is the biggest opponent that we should pay special attention to. For that reason, it is pointed out that about 60% of the naval forces americans are found in the Indo-Pacific region. China is portrayed as an authoritarian country that is a great danger to the “free” international order current and the “security and prosperity”.

As examples, it emphasizes that both Russia and China seek to control various natural resources sea, to the detriment of the sovereignty of other countries over their exclusive economic zones, and to restrict the access of other nations to different oceans, limiting the freedom of the seas. In addition, it underlines the fact that China is building nuclear-capable missiles. And, of course, refers to the New Silk road China's One Belt One Road initiative) as a potential threat to the united States because it would allow him to act the forces China outside of your region, exerting considerable influence in the rest of the world. In Russia, the main threats revolve around cyber-attacks or attacks on the laying of submarine cables. Also do not stop in view of the potential threat arising from the use of nuclear weapons and their military forces.

Other threats and challenges the more general identified include the actions of violent extremists and criminal organizations, piracy, drug trafficking, the competition for marine resources, human trafficking, and other illicit acts. In addition, it is mentioned only once to climate change as a threat to the coastal nations with the increase of the sea level, the depletion of fish stocks, and a climate more severe, however one does not establish a line of action to combat this phenomenon.

On the basis of the identification of these threats, the roadmap it is recommended that further consists of several actions. You must be a naval power integrated and cooperative in all domains, in addition to strengthen and expand alliances and partnerships americans with other countries and relevant stakeholders, for example, in NATO, in order to strengthen favorable balance of sea power. It is necessary for this country to prevail in the competition daily and deter their competitors of armed aggression, of all sorts, to protect the country and their allies. In turn, it is said that the united States should do everything possible to control the seas to deny the achievement of the objectives of its rivals, and defeat their forces, managing to balance the risks threatening. The important thing is to set priorities and act around your achievement. The priorities identified in this Strategy are, as has already been mentioned: the competition with China, the preparation for future wars, and to prevent competitors evil to achieve their goals. Also, it is set as priority keep training and training to the members of their armed forces and, above all, to continue to modernize its naval force to “maintain and preserve your advantage in the sea”.

In the third place, in terms of the Strategy France “for the Sea and its Coast”, you should start by pointing out that the same is a great framework, and also includes specific strategies for the “ecological Transition towards sustainable development”, “Research” and “Biodiversity”. This Strategy framework also fails to point out the vital importance of the sea to the country, which maintains a presence in all the seas and oceans (except the Arctic), and has the second space marine biggest in all of the world, given its 11 million square kilometres under their sovereignty or national jurisdiction. There is No doubt that France is a great maritime nation, and intends to maintain such a status in the years to come. Its maritime economy is very important, are calculated approximately figures of 30 billion euros average derived from such activities, which involves more than 450 thousand jobs.

In this document, are detailed four goals of “complementary and inseparable”long-term, to structure the Strategy of Maritime Security of the country. The first is “the ecological transition for the sea and coasts” towards a sustainable development, recognizing the challenges and difficulties that climate change brings, and that, in short, are detrimental to the ecosystem and humanity. The second is the “development of the blue economy, sustainable” that is to say the economy linked with the sea, and includes a large number of jobs and occupies an important place in the gross domestic product. In that line, is to make a rational use and measured natural resources, to avoid its rapid depletion. The third objective involves “the good environmental status of the marine environment and the conservation of a coastal attractive” that, in connection with the above, stresses the need to protect the marine ecosystem with a view to their sustainable use current and future potential, and maintain its attractiveness to promote tourism on the coasts. The fourth and final objective is the “influence of France as a maritime nation” which demonstrates its great potential and leadership, and that, to be recognized throughout the world as such, is involved in the issues related with the sea. Exerting its undeniable influence, this purpose is made with the interest of France has a leading role in negotiations, european, and outside of the continent, in relation to matters on the seas and oceans.

Associated to these objectives, there are 26 priority actions, organized around four-axis cross-sectional, similar to what has already been touched on: “trust in the knowledge and innovation”; “develop maritime territories and coastal sustainable and resilient”; “support and enhance initiatives and to remove barriers” and “to promote a vision of French in the European Union and in international negotiations”. Among the priority actions can be noted, the generation of knowledge about the sea in the society, to increase the capacity of research on the sea, and the support of innovations at sea, protect the resources and the balance biological-ecological, to maintain the security in the maritime areas, to achieve energy efficiency derived from the sea, making France's ports and the largest in Europe and to be the “gear of the blue growth” in that continent.

An interesting aspect of the Strategy French is that, as in the Strategy of new zealand, in itself recognizes its flexible character and “live”. That is to say, the text adopted is not rigid in terms of their modification and must be adapted to the new circumstances, through successive revisions, which will take place every six years as a maximum time. From thence it is inferred that France understands and addresses the safety in terms of traditional and modern at the same time and that, in view of the challenges and threats that are identifying progressively develop new lines of action.

There is not in this Strategy, a section where you specify the threats potential to maritime security in French. However, it can be said that at all times referred to climate change as an urgent challenge to solve, due to its multifaceted consequences, and that also places great emphasis on regain the power and prestige of French, maybe a little eroded by other powers, in matters relating to seas and oceans. In addition, we identify, in passing, threats such as illegal fishing and exploitation of resources inappropriately, illegal trafficking of various elements, and any damage that might be committed against human life in the sea, which must be preserved.

Fourth, the Integrated Maritime Strategy 2050 of the African Union represented, from a different view, a number of topics already covered in the previous national strategies discussed. This instrument begins by noting that “it is a means to an end” specific: the prosperity, development and growth of Africa. The vision that brings this Strategy is to build on the “feasibility sea” for the people of the continent and promoting the interests of the countries you will find there. And, more ambitiously, indicates that in the future there will be a twist geostrategic for the return to the lost afrocentrism in the world.

Of course, being of an integrated Strategy, it is a clear effort of regional cooperation and integration to face the challenges maritime continent, and to promote a sustainable development and a “blue economy” to cultivate the creation of wealth for Africa. The countries of the region, and other interest groups and pressure africans, recognize that the existence of principles, challenges, threats, opportunities, and common goals leads to cooperate and to establish common standards. There should be a “governance sustainable”, from africa and for Africa, in respect of inland waters, and seas and oceans.

It should be noted that the total length of the coastline of the continent, including its islands, exceeds 26,000 nautical miles. And that, of the 54 countries recognized in Africa, there are 38 of them that are of coastal or island. The sea is vital for Africa since 90% of its imports and exports are conducted by sea and, in addition, fisheries resources are a great contribution to nutrition.

It clearly lays out the desired end state for the region in 2050: the “increase of wealth creation in Africa contributes positively to the socio-economic development, as well as to a higher stability of national, regional and continental levels through collaborative efforts, concerted, cooperative, coordinated, consistent and confidence-building at multiple levels to build blocks of activities in the maritime sector in concert with the improvement of the elements of maritime governance”.

The objectives precisely defined in the Strategy are “to establish a Maritime Zone Exclusive Combination of Africa (CEMZA)”; “to improve the creation of wealth and the performance of business, regional and international levels through the ability and capacity development focused on the sea”; “to ensure the safety and protection of sea transport systems”; “to minimize the environmental damage and accelerate recovery from catastrophic events”; “prevent hostile acts and criminals in the sea and coordinate the prosecution of the offenders”; “protect populations, including the assets, the assets and infrastructure of the marine pollution and dumping of toxic waste and nuclear”; “improve the integrated management of coastal zones in Africa”; “promote the ratification, domestication and implementation of the legal instruments”; “to ensure coherence between sectoral policies within and between trading blocs and regional mechanisms” and “to protect the right of access to the sea and freedom of transit of goods to the States connected by land”.

As guiding principles the strategy can be highlighted the so-called “IC5”: the exchange of information, communication, collaboration, cooperation, capacity-building and coordination. Between the goals that is intended to achieve is referred to the comprehensive understanding of the existing challenges and potential; an approach to the situation maritime comprehensive, concerted, coherent and co-ordinated; a common template to guide countries on the revision of the sea, for budget planning and effective allocation of resources; and a business plan that specifies milestones, goals, skills development, and deployment requirements, including the technical and financial support from Africa and also of the development partners.

Between the threats security maritime african identified in this paper we highlight several forms of illegal trafficking, degradation of the marine environment, overfishing and illegal fishing and not reported, numerous damages to the biodiversity and the serious effects of climate change and natural disasters. Also referred to as illegal activities to maritime terrorism, the dumping of toxic waste and oil and piracy and armed robbery at sea. Due to several of the above conflicts, is also a reference to the preservation and security of life and property at sea as factors in risk. Clearly, although not exclusively maritime, the facets of the corruption, the legal frameworks vulnerable, the infrastructure is not maintained, the distortion of democracy, poverty and unemployment impact on the achievement of the objectives of this strategy.

Finally, in fifth and last place, it deals with the Strategy for Maritime Security of the United kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Given that the country is an island, in the same way that the Strategy of new zealand, begins by recognizing that the United Kingdom was always and will continue to be dependent on the sea to reach their prosperity. The maritime sector mobilizes in the british economy more than 14.5 billion pounds sterling and involves more than 180 thousand jobs, of which 95% of the imports and exports are conducted by sea.

Therefore, it indicates that, through this Strategy, the United Kingdom must be able to create a future maritime sustainable and demonstrate “its ambition to continue being a global leader in the maritime”. In this last aspect, it highlights the similarity with the Strategy of the united States to focus on the competition at sea. However, in the Strategy of the United Kingdom, reference is made to historical periods above where the country was the sea power's unique, unquestioned and unmatched. In this sense, to speak of its maritime heritage, and traditions from centuries ago, is similar to the Strategy of France, given that hints of symbols longing of a past that is not easy to return, given the new challenges and threats, and of course as a result of new players in the game.

While now is not the only maritime power, there is no doubt that the Uk is among the first. The text explains that “to take full advantage of these circumstances, and to make sure we remain at the forefront of the stage for global shipping, it is essential to a long-term strategy”. In relation to the above, it is recognized that if we do not act now, the country will be left behind their competitors and his status as a maritime nation leader will be threatened. Literally, it is stressed that “we must not rely on our past achievements to stay relevant on the world stage”. To prevent that from happening, the country must adopt innovative technology, to invest in his industry and being at the height of the circumstances regarding the challenges of new business relationships, environmental risks and security in the long term.

The desired end state this Strategy is “maintaining the Uk's position as a world leader by examining the amplitude of the maritime sector and imagining the industry as it should be for the future generations, marking the path to 2050”. All of that, they say, will be achieved only if it is “take action now” preparing for the Uk to cope with the flexibility of a new world, complex and volatile. It is evident the sense of urgency that is clear from this Strategy, the fear of falling behind and losing the status of managed carefully to maintain for a long time. In short, they observe that the preponderance british in these issues is being eroded slowly.

As threats and challenges identified throughout the Strategy can be inferred climate change and its consequences (sea level rise, coastal erosion and extreme weather events becoming more intense), and competition from other countries such as China (which made explicit reference to his impressive initiative of the New Silk road, this aspect is also highlighted in the Strategy of the united States), illegal activities, and dangerous as terrorism and organized crime, the adaptation to the changes maritime “radical” and global, and their investments, adapt to new global trends and the use of new and renewable energy (which would imply a decline in the role played by the sea to carry oil and gas), among other subjects of importance.

The document is divided into six themed sections, with their respective objectives, to which we should pay attention to. In terms of the tradehighlights their importance for the generation of wealth and employment creation, and emphasizes that the United Kingdom will still proving to be the exponent of free trade around the world, expanding markets. In reference to the marine ecosystemreference is made to your state's fragile and vulnerable, so bring it on-sea activities sustainable is essential. And, linked to this, it is recognized that the communities that live along the coast, they are the most disadvantaged, in your health, and others damage to property, by the impacts of climate change in relation to the sea. To mitigate these impacts, it seeks to increase the role played by the country in the obligations imposed by international regulations, for example, in terms of carbon emissions and the discharge of waste into the sea. In the technology regards, will try to implement new and innovative strategies, which many other countries are already developed, as for example the “smart shipping” (shipping and trade smart). If we consider the area of the infrastructure, it highlights the continued investment in the modernisation of the british ports and the complex of maritime transport, which they undertake to support and increase. In terms of the human capital, that is to say every person working in the different areas of the maritime domain of the british, the british Strategy seeks to prioritize your education, training and constant training to be able to face all the challenges ahead. It also wants to promote their social well-being derived from his work, and indicates that it will try to prioritize the employment of women in the area. Finally, in terms of security and resilience maritimefrom the power, influence and british values, and the rules on international shipping, we will help to build a prosperous future and secure for the United Kingdom, their territories of the high seas and its allies.

Arriving at the end of this work, shutdown mode, and despite the fact that it will establish conclusions more accurate in the third and final policy brief, may be said here that certain issues. In general, the vast majority of the Strategies they manage to match in the establishment of threats, challenges, and risks in common, or, minimally, to point out the emergency similar. This leads us to think that, in international frameworks favourable to cooperation, can be prioritized joint actions, rather than continue old game of “zero-sum”. Also, broadly speaking, is observed in the Strategies of French and british with a hint of nostalgia for the past in which both ruled and fought over control of the world, centuries ago. In this tuning, the united States, novel actor of the TWENTIETH century, developed its Strategy to not lose their advantage, world maritime current to other actors maritime threatening. More to the margin, the Strategy of New Zealand and the African Union are intended to provide frameworks of reinsurance their populations to consolidate his power in your specific space, to ensure their growth and prosperity, and show no pretensions of power projection towards the rest of the international system, given their more limited resources. Finally, and on the basis of the theoretical proposals of Buerger's disease and of the International Maritime Organization taken up at the beginning of this writing, it can be concluded that, although a large extent all the Strategies considered these four specific points, there were no notable differences. Certainly, were the strategies of New Zealand, France and the African Union, those who mentioned issues covered, in any way, all the points. To a lesser extent, the british strategy addresses three of the four points specifically, but there is no mention, at least explicitly, the question of the blue economy. Finally, the north american strategy focuses on the point of the naval power and security, in conjunction with the point of the resilience and human security but, on the contrary, does not mention the points on blue economy and maritime security as well as the other strategies.