Be prepared: minimising and managing risk in maritime operations

This article originally featured in Maritime Risk International, August 2024. 

The global maritime community deploys a number of measures to safeguard commercial vessels and seafarers – an issue which is particularly topical at the moment given various conflicts around the world. For example, we have seen the impact the Russia-Ukraine conflict has had on Black Sea trade.

Even more recently, risk management considerations have been at the fore following the intensification of the Israel-Palestine conflict, which has sparked the targeting of commercial vessels traversing the Suez Canal into the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden by Yemeni Houthi rebels.

Safety measures

Guidelines on safety include the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), which includes specific information on maintaining and enhancing maritime security as well as the master’s responsibility for such measures.

The International Ship and Port Facility (ISPS) Code is a comprehensive set of measures intended to fortify the security of vessels and port facilities. The rationale behind the ISPS Code is to provide a uniform framework for evaluating levels of risk, which in turn enables governments to respond to increased levels of threat or increased vessel/port vulnerability by deploying the appropriate security level protocol. As is common with most risk management endeavour, the ISPS Code requires an assessment of the circumstances of each individual case to determine what response is most appropriate. Given the global nature of this issue, there can be differences in the application and enforcement of such conventions pursuant to the laws of each coastal country and its territorial waters.

In the UK security management is overseen by various governmental agencies including but not limited to The Maritime Security and MLC (Maritime Labour Convention) Branch, which sets out how to comply with SOLAS and the ISPS Code; and the Department for Transport and the Maritime Security and Safety Management Branch (DfT), which is responsible for security across all methods of transportation, including shipping.

Ship security measures

Compliance with the ISPS Code requires vessels to have a ship security plan (SSP). The broad aim of an SSP is to help prevent illegal acts against the vessel and crew, as well as to minimise damage to the marine environment and port infrastructure. In the UK, any SSP must be approved by the Maritime Coastguard Authority and must be accompanied by a ship security assessment as an essential prerequisite.

An important requirement of the ISPS Code is that people with security responsibilities are properly trained. Commercial shipping companies are required to designate a company security officer (CSO) to coordinate the security activities of the vessel and company, which might include liaising with ports and governments. All vessels must also have a properly trained ship security officer (SSO) on board.

The IMO’s effort to combat terrorism and piracy against shipping is the rationale behind the ship security alert system (SSAS). For UK-registered ships the SSAS should be set up to send an alert to a nominated 24-hour contact and also to the National Maritime Operations Centre.

Among other duties, the DfT assumes responsibility for policy on counter-piracy. Its Marine Guidance Note 440 (M) Amendment 1 aims to help the maritime community appreciate the risks posed by piracy and other acts of violence against commercial shipping. This Note contains specific guidance for territories such as Somalia, the Gulf of Aden and the Gulf of Guinea, including but not limited to the recommended practices to deter acts of piracy and armed robbery. Such practices include voyage planning and risk assessment, maintaining a high speed through high-risk areas, and registering in advance with the European Naval Force through the Maritime Security Centre Horn of Africa.

Navigating conflicts

Whereas a conflict is usually described as a fight between armed troops, war is hostility toward other parties that is issued by governments or states. The Israel-Palestine conflict might be described as war, but there is an interesting question about the status of the Houthi rebel attacks in the Red Sea – are they war? The prevailing view seems to be yes. Although the Houthis (who are aligned with Hamas) are a militant group that oppose Yemen’s internationally recognised government, they are clearly a pseudo-government because they control a considerable swathe of the country’s territory along the Red Sea.

Any attack on a commercial ship engaged in innocent passage through international waters is a clear breach of international law. More recently the Houthi rebels appear to have concentrated their attacks on vessels they assess to have some sort of link to Israel. Lloyd’s List recently reported that Mediterranean Shipping Co (MSC) was being targeted as a matter of policy; essentially because one of MSC’s owners held Israeli citizenship.

The best management practices to deter piracy and enhance maritime security in the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden, Indian Ocean and Arabian Sea (BMP5), suggests a thorough risk assessment is undertaken, with specific consideration to include, for example:

• Potential cooperation with the military;
• The deployment of privately contracted armed security personnel; and
• Analysis of the vessel’s capabilities and vulnerabilities.

The inherent problem with BMP5 is that it does not provide effective defence against missiles and drones. The only failsafe way to ensure a vessel’s safety and security would be to re-route via the Cape of Good Hope – which many vessel operators have done. Such action is costly in terms of fuel consumption for the extra 3,500-plus nm and the associated two-week delay, the apportionment of which is not always contractually clear.

As a direct result it is essential that, if the voyage is to proceed through the Red Sea/Gulf of Aden, insured parties must liaise with their war risk underwriters, informing them of the voyage plans, and pay any additional premium.

Unfortunately, the situations in Ukraine and Gaza do not show any immediate signs of resolution. As a result, any party to a maritime endeavour with potential exposure should consult professional risk advisory companies, so that the vessels are as prepared as they possibly can be in the circumstances.

Looking to the future

The Maritime Safety Committee of the IMO met for its 108th session at its London headquarters in May 2024. A resolution was adopted at this meeting in response to the Houthi attacks on commercial ships and seafarers in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. The official meeting summary noted:

“Since the hijacking of the MV Galaxy Leader in November 2023, which remains detained along with its crew, around 50 dangerous and destabilising maritime attacks have been carried out in the area. Several seafarers have lost their lives while others have suffered life-changing injuries.

“The resolution deplores and condemns in the strongest possible terms the illegal and unjustifiable attacks, which threaten the safety and welfare of seafarers and the marine environment. It demands that the Houthis immediately cease attacking commercial ships and calls for the immediate and unconditional release of the Galaxy Leader and its crew.

“The resolution emphasises that all member states should adhere to their obligations under the targeted UN arms embargo and take the necessary measures to prevent the direct or indirect supply of arms and related materiel of all types to the Houthis, as called for in United Nations Security Council resolution 2216.

“It urges member states and observer organisations to provide maximum assistance to seafarers affected by attacks. Calling for peaceful dialogue and diplomacy, it urged any party that may have influence with the Houthis to use that influence to seek an end to these attacks.

“The resolution encouraged ship operators and vessels to carefully assess the nature and unpredictability of recent events, as well as potential for continued attacks in the area, when considering transit plans, based on vessel profile, business need and risk tolerance.”

While the world has enjoyed a long period of relative geopolitical stability, the current situation in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden has the clear potential to cause serious global instability; so much so that the IMO deems governmental intervention necessary to prevent further escalation. This sentiment was made clear by the IMO secretary-general Arsenio Dominguez, who echoed the Resolution:

“IMO member states are unequivocal in their condemnation of these reckless attacks. The maritime industry sustains the supply chains that are the lifeline of nations and populations around the world – innocent seafarers and commercial ships trading essential supplies should be free to navigate, unhindered by geopolitical tensions.

“I call on all governments and relevant organisations to provide maximum assistance to seafarers affected, and to spare no effort in finding a resolution to this crisis”.

With the proactive assistance of all 176 IMO member states, it is hoped that peaceful dialogue and diplomacy can resolve the crises in the Ukraine and the Red Sea. Until such time, the maritime industry and insurers must remain on high alert.