The modified and smaller High Risk Area (HRA) in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean has now been in operation for six months. In that time, there have been several incidents that have resulted in armed security teams taking action against approaching Somali pirate skiffs.

In the most alarming of these cases, weapons and ladders were sighted. Yet, even allowing for these incidents, the Indian Ocean is arguably one of the safest oceans in the world. This is because the security framework put in place since the outbreak of Somali piracy in 2008 is extremely effective, denying Somali pirates the freedom to mount successful attacks on commercial shipping.

The question is whether the reduction in the size of the HRA in December 2015 has resulted in the industry interpreting this change as an opportunity to relax their security posture, thereby inadvertently eroding the hard won gains of recent years.

Given the serious threat Somali piracy posed to international trade and those working onboard merchant vessels at its height in 2008 to 2012, a strong international response and comprehensive security framework was developed to bring the situation under control. Over time, the actions taken by governments and industry were extremely successful in combatting Somali piracy, and remain a good example of what can be achieved through constructive collaboration.

The decision by the United Nations (UN) and the Joint War Risk Committee in October 2015 to reduce the HRA was welcomed by many sections of the shipping industry, and reflected a recognition that if the security framework is to remain credible, it had to evolve and remain aligned to the nature of the prevailing threat.

Since the reduction of the HRA, statistics from international organisations such as EU NAVFOR, Combined Maritime Forces (CMF) and NATO show a 10% decrease in the number of armed security teams in the Arabian Sea and a 5% decrease within the Gulf of Aden in the first three months of 2016. The teams are also smaller and the quality of some of them remains questionable. Vessels have been routing closer to Somalia and Yemen, including sailing between Somalia and Socotra Island, in sight of land. At the same time as this more relaxed security posture, there has concurrently been an increased level of reported criminal activity in the HRA, particularly off Yemen, and there have been two instances of merchant vessels coming under fire in the past few months.

The critical issue is that incidents in the Gulf of Aden were probably undertaken by Somali pirates, and that incidents like these lend credence to EU NAVFOR’s recent assessment that low level speculative attacks will continue in the Western Indian Ocean.

It is vital to understand that Somali pirates and their investors are well informed and operate at an international level and, therefore, are likely to be making their own assessment of what the shipping companies are doing to protect their vessels. We should assume that they are hearing and reading the dialogue that surrounds whether armed guarding will continue, or not, and whether the numbers are dropping off.

Of course, the smaller HRA has not of itself made the risk of piracy greater — or any less. What it has done is created the sense in the mind of some security experts and the senior management of shipping companies that the security posture in commercial vessels can be relaxed.

Consequently, as increasing numbers of vessels forego an armed team, the opportunities for the Somalis to achieve a capture are growing. With this there is a risk that the hard-won gains of the past several years will be squandered, and the integrity of the security framework in the Indian Ocean fatally compromised.

Sadly, the nature of piracy events this year has confirmed that Somali piracy has yet to be consigned to the dustbin of history. It is a great shame that it may take a high-profile hijacking for some members of the international shipping community to sit up and take notice.