AMBREY THREAT CIRCULAR> SOMALI PIRATE HIJACKINGS
Date issued: 29 April 2026
This document has been approved for distribution by Ambrey Analytics Ltd.
“Three attacks this month highlight a renewed surge in Somali piracy, driven by opportunistic attacks on vulnerable vessels operating close to shore. The analysis shows that factors such as low freeboard, slow speed, and lack of armed security are significantly increasing exposure to hijack and K&R risk, particularly on routes to Mogadishu and Garacad. Smarter routing, risk mitigation, and informed insurance decision-making are needed in this heightened threat environment.”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
- A tanker and a general cargo ship are highly likely under the control of Somali pirate action groups (PAGs).
- The vessels are currently held in Somali Indian Ocean territorial seas in known holding areas.
- These events, that occurred since 21 April 2026, underlined a heightened risk of a K&R claim enroute to/from Mogadishu and Garacad.
- This research also highlighted the importance of understanding an insured vessel’s routing, as a vulnerable bulker was at increased risk over the last month despite not breaching Somali territorial seas.
- This is the first simultaneous hijacking of merchant vessels since March 2024, when the bulkers RUEN and ABDULLAH were under pirate control.
- Somali PAGs continue to operate opportunistically, with recent incidents confirming the known capability.
- Armed security highly likely prevented the hijacking of another general cargo ship.
SITUATION
Since 21 April 2026, Somali PAGs have hijacked a Palau-flagged combined chemical and oil tanker, and a St Kitts-Nevis-flagged general cargo ship. Another merchant vessel also came under attack. All attacks occurred along the Indian Ocean Somali coastline, within 42nm of the shore.
On 26 April, a St Kitts-Nevis-flagged, Vietnam-owned, general cargo ship was hijacked 49NM south of Eyl. Ten pirates approached the vessel in three skiffs. Most of the fifteen crew members mustered on the bridge during the incident. There were no reports of using a citadel. The vessel was underway at 8.5kts between Al Adabiyah, Egypt, destined for Mombasa, Kenya, at the time. She had a low 2.1m estimated freeboard, which likely explained her routing behaviour close to the Somali coast, approximately 12NM offshore. The vessel did not call a Vessel Borne Armoury before the incident; there were no indications of armed guards being aboard.
On 23 April, a Barbados-flagged general cargo ship was attacked 44NM southeast of Garacad, Somalia. Five suspects approached in a white-hulled skiff to within 0.3NM. The suspects then opened fire with automatic weapons, and the embarked private armed security team fired four warning shots. The skiff subsequently turned away. The general cargo ship had an estimated freeboard of 7.6m and was underway between Mogadishu and Karachi, Pakistan, 40NM offshore Somalia.
On 21 April, a Palau-flagged tanker was hijacked whilst underway 32.5NM south-southeast of Hafun. Six pirates boarded the vessel, armed with AK-variants and an RPG. Some crew, Pakistani and Sri Lankan nationals, gathered in the citadel during the event. The vessel was vulnerable, with only a 0.9m estimated freeboard. Her low freeboard may explain why she was transiting within territorial seas. The vessel had an opaque ownership, registered to a trust in the Marshall Islands, was formerly Chinese-owned. She was destined for Mogadishu at the time of the hijacking. Prior to this, she was regularly loading cargo off the UAE and calling into Somali ports in Berbera and Boosaaso. Her loading operations were also opaque. On two occasions in the previous year, she appeared to perform STS with Iran-linked tankers. However, she was not sanctioned. There were no indications she was supplying fishing vessels operating offshore Somalia; though she had a very low speed, between 3-5 kts, she did not alter course significantly during her transit. Her route was not unusual for a small tanker calling Mogadishu. She did report on AIS “MOGADISHO.ARMGAURD” as her destination, however, the vessel did not appear to call a Vessel Borne Armoury during her transit, and there was no mention of guards in the incident details. It is unlikely any were aboard. Her hull market value was estimated to be US $3.25m.
The vessels were taken to areas known…