Fri, Mar 29, 2024
23.12°C Kathmandu
Air Quality in Kathmandu: 134Opinion
Trade in blood
The links between illegal wildlife trade and terrorism financing will need focussed aimbookmark
Navin Singh Khadka
Published at : February 21, 2014
It was not meant to be just another international meet against illegal wildlife trade. What promised that this one would be different was mainly its much talked-about agenda: addressing the possible nexus between wildlife poaching and terrorism. Diplomats, former military officials and security officials were all stressing the need to deal with illegal wildlife trade for international security.
Financing terrorism
“Poaching of endangered elephants and rhinos has become a conservation crisis and profits from wildlife crimes are filling the coffers of terrorist organisations,” Johan Bergenas wrote in a piece co-authored with Monica Medina in the Washington Post just before the wildlife conference in London last week. “An undercover investigation in Kenya concluded that illegal ivory funds as much as 40 percent of the operations of al-Shabab, the group behind the November attack at a Nairobi shopping mall where 60 people were killed,” the piece read.
Coinciding with the illegal wildlife trade conference, Bergenas’ organisation, the Stimson Centre, brought out a report throwing light on the possible connection between wildlife poaching and terrorism financing. “The spike in poaching and wildlife crime coincides with the increased involvement of sophisticated transnational organised criminals and terrorist organisations,” the report read.
By the time the conference was over, the issue appeared to be buried in the lengthy declaration paper. “Wildlife trade is an organised and widespread criminal activity, involving transnational networks,” it read. “The proceeds are in some cases used to support other criminal activities and have been linked to armed groups engaged in internal and cross border conflicts.”
That was all. The rest of the declaration mainly focused on international mechanisms and legal arrangements to combat wildlife trade. The seemingly downplayed treatment of the issue of wildlife poaching financing terrorism was understandable.
Despite rising voices against illegal trade, key officials, however, have put such claims under question. When the United Nations’ Environment Programme recently stated the connection between illegal wildlife trade and terrorism-financing, the chief of Interpol distanced himself from the claim.
“My answer must be very clear: I am a policeman and to make such an assertion, I have to have evidence and at this stage, there is no such evidence,” Interpol’s executive director Jean Michel Louboutin said. This was in response to an UNEP statement that read: “Studies indicate that the illegal trade in wildlife and timber may help finance terrorism and organised crime across the world.”
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon even said that there were signs of illegal trade in elephant ivory funding armed groups including the Lord’s Resistance Army, whose fighters have spread across the Congo, South Sudan and the Central African Republic. Given conflicting statements, the London wildlife conference’s declaration at least appears to have tried to address the problem without making too much noise.
All smoke, no fire
Although there was only a one-liner on the topic, the recommendations for the way forward suggest that the issue has indeed become a major international focus. But the declaration pins high hopes on the UN’s treaties and tools. For instance, it repeatedly mentions the possible role of the treaty against corruption or mechanisms to fight organised crime.
Have these tools helped in the battle against other crimes, like, for example, drug-trafficking? If they have, then the fight against wildlife trafficking could get some ammunition as well. But if they are like most other international mechanisms, the talk about smashing the link between illegal wildlife trade and terrorism will all end up as all smoke and no fire.
The international agenda of wildlife conservation reached an important milestone in recent years when world powers realised that poaching was funding alleged terrorist organisations. During her last days as US Secretary of State last year, Hillary Clinton launched an intelligence review on the impact of wildlife trafficking on national security. Based on that review, President Barack Obama created an interagency taskforce to develop an anti-poaching strategy. Before, such strategies were largely about protecting species to sustain ecosystems and ecologies. Now, they are being seen in the context of national security.
Africa to Asia
If it has really come to this with even the superpower, the US, concerned, nature conservation smash-hit stories like Nepal have a reason to worry. It is true that poaching of rhinos in Chitwan National Park has come down to almost zero even as neighbouring Kaziranga National park in India lost nearly 40 pachyderms in the last year-and-a-half. But if the demand for illegal wildlife products continues strong in the oriental market—with Vietnam emerging as a major destination after China-the international network for illegal wildlife trade will certainly find alternatives, if screws are tightened on traditional suppliers.
“With all focus on Africa, Asia’s wildlife will now take the hit,” says Belinda Wright of the Wildlife Protection Society of India. “This is the timely message we gave to the organisers of the London wildlife conference.” Remember how poachers turned to leopards after the number of tigers dwindled drastically in India in the last decade? Then, no link was made between the poaching of South Asian wildlife and terrorism. Today, if such a nexus exists in Africa, it could also exist anywhere else as well.
Khadka is a BBC journalist based in London
×