The European Union Naval Force (EUNAVFOR) has patrolled Somali waters since 2008, supposedly to combat piracy and secure trade routes. While piracy was a real threat in the late 2000s, the mission has long exceeded its original purpose. Instead of strengthening Somalia’s maritime security, EUNAVFOR has purposely pursued its desired objectives of reinforced external control over Somalia’s territorial waters.
EUNAVFOR’s presence is partly backed by the 2009 Djibouti Code of Conduct (DCoC), supported by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and major international shipping companies. It gave foreign navies, particularly the European Union, a pretext to assert control over Somali waters.
On paper, the EU mission was aimed at empowering Somalia and its neighbours to secure their waters with international support. However, in reality, it legitimised a surge of foreign naval forces, granting them broad operational freedom under UN Security Council (UNSC) resolutions.
These UNSC resolutions pressured Somalia to relinquish control of its waters under the pretext of international security.
From the start of 2013, piracy off Somalia’s coast had virtually disappeared after peaking in the early 2010s. Yet, foreign naval forces still patrolled its territorial waters under UNSC resolutions, leaving Somalia without full sovereignty over its seas. Since 2008, the UNSC had repeatedly renewed mandates allowing these forces to operate.
Despite the sharp decline in Somali piracy after 2012, the EU remained intent on maintaining its naval presence. In December 2024, the EU Council preemptively extended Operation Atalanta (Operation Aspides) through to early 2027—just ahead of a key UN review on piracy measures.
Claiming a renewed piracy in 2023–24, the EU extended EUNAVFOR’s mission. With an expanded mandate covering weapons and drug interdiction, EUNAVFOR now serves a broader, long-term security agenda beyond piracy.
Somali officials claimed the EU pressured the government to extend counter-piracy measures, using security aid as leverage.
European diplomats allegedly warned that rejecting the UNSC mandate could put EU funding for the African Union peacekeeping mission in Somalia at risk.
As the primary backer of AU peacekeeping, the EU wielded significant influence, reportedly hinting at funding cuts if Somalia refused. Caught between accepting foreign naval patrols or jeopardising critical counter-insurgency support, Somalia held its ground, ultimately ending the UNSC piracy resolution despite mounting pressure.
After years of resistance, Somalia regained control of its waters in early 2022. Under President Mohamed Farmaajo, the government declared UN anti-piracy measures fulfilled and refused further extensions.
The UNSC’s counter-piracy resolution expired on March 3, 2022, for the first time since 2008, ending internationally sanctioned operations and restoring Somalia’s maritime sovereignty after 14 years.
Foreign naval patrols off Somalia have hurt coastal communities. Years of anti-piracy efforts have disrupted fishing, especially in Puntland and Galmudug, as fishermen fear harassment or misidentification. Frequent warship inspections deter many from going to fish.
For many, fishing is a vital livelihood, and this climate of fear has hurt incomes and food security. Ironically, an operation meant to secure maritime safety ended up pushing local fishermen out of their trade in their own country.
With little communication or accountability, EU navies seldom addressed the economic impact on coastal communities, leaving behind bitterness among those who felt abandoned in the pursuit of an international security agenda that ignored their rights and livelihoods.
Young teens were detained as suspected pirates and sent abroad with little legal oversight. EU and allied forces captured hundreds, some misidentified. Unable to prosecute in Europe, navies sent them to African and Asian courts, often without Somali consular support.
Many Somalis were jailed abroad; their families were unaware. Rights groups flagged opaque trials, mistreatment, and foreign naval impunity. The result: deep resentment over unchecked operations in Somali waters.
Critics say EUNAVFOR ignored illegal fishing and toxic dumping, focusing only on piracy. Foreign trawlers devastated Somali waters livelihoods, yet EU forces did nothing, seen as hypocrisy.
Foreign entities polluted Somali coasts for decades, yet EUNAVFOR, despite sophisticated surveillance, took no action.
Many Somalis argue true security means tackling resource theft and pollution, not just piracy.
Global conferences prioritised shipping security over Somalia’s needs. Funds protected vessels and prosecuted pirates, while Somalia’s coast guard and judiciary stayed weak.
In his 2019 book, Piracy in Somalia: Violence and Development in the Horn of Africa, Awet Tewelde Weldemichael explains the intricate socio-economic dynamics that have shaped the rise of piracy along the Somali coast and how the international community has focused on militarised anti-piracy operations while ignoring the real problems including the plight of coastal communities, illegal fishing and dumping of waste into their waters by foreigners.
While EUNAVFOR may have tackled piracy, initially, it should be clear that foreign military presence in Somali waters should not outlast its necessity. Prolonged deployments risk dependency, creating local resentment, and great-power ambitions disguised as security efforts.
On March 3, 2025, UNSC Resolution 2776 extended foreign naval authority over Somali-linked vessels while renewing Al-Shabaab sanctions. Despite reclaiming maritime sovereignty, Somalia’s government backed it, raising doubts about its independence.
The EU, a top donor to Somalia, has also harmed Somali livelihoods through naval operations. Security efforts pushed fishing communities into poverty while ignoring illegal fishing, toxic dumping, and maritime governance—factors fueling piracy.
This policy incongruity reinforced grievances that groups like Al Shabaab exploit. The AS group has used EUNAVFOR’s continued presence and the impact on coastal communities as propaganda to delegitimise the Somali government and African Union forces, portraying them as complicit in foreign control over Somalia’s resources.
By failing to account for the consequences of its naval mission, the EU has inadvertently provided extremists with narratives to further destabilise Somalia.
