The United States Has Taken Steps to Implement Its Counterpiracy Plan, but Has Not Evaluated Its Efforts or Updated Its Plan

U.S. agencies have made progress implementing the NSC’s Countering  Piracy off the Horn of Africa: Partnership and Action Plan (Action Plan)  to lead and support international efforts to counter piracy, but the effort  faces several implementation challenges. U.S. Government Has Taken Steps to Implement Planned Efforts to Prevent, Disrupt, and Prosecute Pirate Attacks but Faces Challenges

In collaboration with their international and industry partners, U.S.  agencies have taken steps across the three lines of action established in  the Action Plan to: (1) prevent attacks by reducing the vulnerability of the  maritime domain, (2) disrupt acts of piracy in ways consistent with  international law and the rights and responsibilities of coastal and flag  states, and (3) ensure that those who commit acts of piracy are held  accountable for their actions by facilitating the prosecution of suspected  pirates. For example, as figure  7 shows, the number of hostages of various nationalities captured by  Somali pirates from 2007 to 2009 more than quintupled. The U.S. Government Has Not Evaluated the Costs, Benefits, or Effectiveness of Its Counterpiracy Efforts, Reported Results, or Updated Its Action Plan Accordingly

The Action Plan’s objective is to repress piracy in the interest of the global  economy, among other things, but the effectiveness of U.S. resources  applied to counterpiracy is unclear because the interagency group  responsible for monitoring the Action Plan’s implementation was not  specifically charged with tracking the cost of U.S. activities or  systematically evaluating the relative benefits or effectiveness of the  Action Plan’s tasks and neither the interagency steering group nor the  federal agencies involved have performed these tasks. Our prior work has  shown that federal agencies engaged in collaborative efforts need to  evaluate activities to identify areas for improvement. Moreover, as pirates  have adapted their tactics, the Action Plan has not been revised. The United States also has  collaborated well with international military partners and industry groups. Within the U.S. government, while agencies have implemented some  collaborative practices, other practices could be implemented to further  enhance collaboration. The U.S. government has not made substantial  progress on those Action Plan tasks that involve multiple agencies and  those in which the NSC has not clearly identified roles and responsibilities  or coordinated with U.S. agencies to develop joint guidance. This office  serves as a conduit for information focused on safety of shipping and  conducts outreach with the shipping industry, such as through newsletters  to encourage the use of self-protection measures. Multiple agencies  are involved in collecting information on pirate finances. Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve U.S. government efforts to implement the Countering Piracy  off the Horn of Africa: Partnership and Action Plan (Action Plan),  enhance interagency collaboration, provide information to decision  makers on results, and better target resources, we recommend that the  Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, in  collaboration with the Secretaries of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice,  State, Transportation, and the Treasury take the following four actions:  reassess and revise the Action Plan to better address evolving  conditions off the Horn of Africa and their effect on priorities and  plans;  identify measures of effectiveness to use in evaluating U.S.  counterpiracy efforts;    direct the Counter-Piracy Steering Group to (1) identify the costs of  U.S. counterpiracy efforts including operational, support, and  personnel costs; and (2) assess the benefits, and effectiveness of U.S.  counterpiracy activities; and  clarify agency roles and responsibilities and develop joint guidance,  information-sharing mechanisms, and other means to operate across  agency boundaries for implementing key efforts such as strategic  communication, disrupting pirate revenue, and facilitating prosecution. Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We provided a draft of this report for review to the Departments of  Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, State, Transportation, and the  Treasury; and the National Security Council (NSC). The NSC did not  provide comments on the report or our recommendations. To identify the extent to which U.S. government agencies are collaborating  with each other and with international and industry partners, we  synthesized key practices for enhancing and sustaining collaboration on  complex national security issues from our prior work. U.S., international, and industry officials credit the reduction in the rate of  successful pirate attacks from approximately 40 percent in 2008 to 22  percent in 2009, in part, to international patrols in the Gulf of Aden. However,  coalition officials acknowledge U.S. and international forces face  challenges in interdicting pirate incidents as pirates have adapted their  tactics and expanded their area of activity to the much larger and harder- to-patrol Indian Ocean. In addition, Somalia has lacked a functioning  central government since 1991. As a result, according to FBI officials,  the FBI Organized Crime Section is not working to build a case against  pirate leaders and enablers.
Why GAO Did This Study

Somali pirates operating off the Horn of Africa have attacked more than 450 ships and taken nearly 2,400 hostages since 2007. A small number of U.S.-flagged vessels and ships have been among those affected. As Somalia lacks a functioning government and is unable to repress piracy in its waters, the National Security Council (NSC) developed the interagency Countering Piracy off the Horn of Africa: Partnership and Action Plan (Action Plan) in December 2008 to prevent, disrupt, and prosecute piracy off the Horn of Africa in collaboration with international and industry partners. GAO was asked to evaluate the extent to which U.S. agencies (1) have implemented the plan, and any challenges they face in doing so, and (2) have collaborated with partners in counterpiracy efforts. GAO examined counterpiracy plans, activities, collaborative practices, and data, and interviewed industry and international partners and officials at U.S. agencies and the Combined Maritime Forces in Bahrain.

What GAO Found

The U.S. government has made progress in implementing its Action Plan, in collaboration with international and industry partners, but pirates have adapted their tactics and expanded their area of operations, almost doubling the number of reported attacks from 2008 to 2009, and the U.S. government has yet to evaluate the costs, benefits, or effectiveness of its efforts or update its plan accordingly. The United States has advised industry partners on self-protection measures, contributed leadership and assets to an international coalition patrolling pirate-infested waters, and concluded prosecution arrangements with Kenya and the Seychelles. Officials credit collaborative efforts with reducing the pirates' rate of success in boarding ships and hijacking vessels in 2009. However, from 2007 to 2009, the most recent year for which complete data were available, the total number of hijackings reported to the International Maritime Bureau increased, ransoms paid by the shipping industry increased sharply, and attacks spread from the heavily patrolled Gulf of Aden--the focus of the Action Plan--to the vast Indian Ocean. The Action Plan's objective is to repress piracy as effectively as possible, but the effectiveness of U.S. resources applied to counterpiracy is unclear because the interagency group responsible for monitoring the Action Plan's implementation has not tracked the cost of U.S. activities--such as operating ships and aircraft and prosecuting suspected pirates--nor systematically evaluated the relative benefits or effectiveness of the Action Plan's tasks. GAO's prior work has shown that federal agencies engaged in collaborative efforts need to evaluate their activities to identify areas for improvement. Moreover, as pirates have adapted their tactics, the Action Plan has not been revised. Without a plan that reflects new developments and assesses the costs, benefits, and effectiveness of U.S. efforts, decision makers will lack information that could be used to target limited resources to provide the greatest benefit, commensurate with U.S. interests in the region. The U.S. government has collaborated with international and industry partners to counter piracy, but it has not implemented some key practices for enhancing and sustaining collaboration among U.S. agencies. According to U.S. and international stakeholders, the U.S. government has shared information with partners for military coordination. However, agencies have made less progress on several key efforts that involve multiple agencies--such as those to address piracy through strategic communications, disrupt pirate finances, and hold pirates accountable--in part because the Action Plan does not designate which agencies should lead or carry out 13 of the 14 tasks. For instance, the Departments of Defense, Justice, State, and the Treasury all collect information on pirate finances, but none has lead responsibility for analyzing that information to build a case against pirate leaders or financiers. The NSC, the President's principal arm for coordinating national security policy among government agencies, could bolster interagency collaboration and the U.S. contribution to counterpiracy efforts by clarifying agency roles and responsibilities and encouraging the agencies to develop joint guidance to implement their efforts.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the NSC reassess and update its Action Plan; identify metrics; assess the costs, benefits, and effectiveness of U.S. counterpiracy activities; and clarify agency roles and responsibilities. The NSC did not comment. The Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, State, Transportation, and the Treasury provided comments to clarify facts in the report.