IMO’s Arsenio Dominguez is comfortable talking the talk

THERE was a time when any press event at the London headquarters of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) would pull in the same, now rather dwindling, band of shipping journalists – including yours truly.

Apparently, the times are a-changing at the IMO, as Bob Dylan didn’t say. A “press breakfast” at the UN specialist agency’s impressive Albert Embankment building last Thursday (Feb 1) was packed out. Everybody from Russia’s Tass news agency to the BBC’s World Service was there – far outnumbering us maritime hacks. There was also a good number of reporters from environmental publications.

So what has happened? Well, actually three things – one, the Houthis have got close to closing the Red Sea, and thus the Suez Canal. Two, shipping is now widely portrayed as one of the problems when it comes to saving the planet. 

And three, a new IMO secretary-general took up office on Jan 1. Although Arsenio Dominguez has worked at the IMO for many years, he has been signalling very strongly that things are going to be different. For good measure, while giving due respect to his predecessor Kitack Lim, he gave short shrift to the suggestion from a reporter that he was the continuity candidate moving into the role.

In fact, holding a press conference such as last week’s really highlighted that a new regime is in place. Unlike most of the previous nine IMO secretaries-general, Dominguez is comfortable talking the talk (most shipping people I speak to think he can also walk the walk).

Consummate politician

As somebody put it to me, the IMO now has a “consummate politician” at the top. He demonstrated that by delivering a 17-minute long, clear and concise address, apparently with little reference to his notes and most definitely without resorting, as almost all officials do, to a PowerPoint presentation.

GET BT IN YOUR INBOX DAILY

Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox.

Sign UpVIEW ALL

Then he took questions for well over an hour. After rolling up ravenous at 10 am for my breakfast, it was almost noon before I could start wolfing down some rather superior IMO sandwiches.

I have never seen a performance like it at the IMO. Dominguez skilfully fielded almost every question, many of them quite barbed. The only one that he didn’t manage to answer concerned the Red Sea situation. A journalist put forward the view that the IMO should simply get both sides (did he mean the Houthis and the Israelis?) to sit down together and sort things out; and if they couldn’t reach an agreement, then the IMO should persuade the wives of both parties to deny their husbands their conjugal rights. Dominguez moved swiftly on to the next question.

That surreal moment aside, the proceedings were skilfully used to put over the new chief’s agenda, and then, in the reply to every question, highlight just how the IMO works. It was abundantly apparent that many in the general press had only a vague understanding of shipping and its global regulator.

Dominguez’s presentation addressed four areas. The first was the regulatory process, or how the IMO works. He stressed that the fundamental purpose of the organisation is to ensure safety, and pointed to the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) convention. Secondly, he emphasised the work that the IMO is doing to de-escalate the crisis in the Red Sea, making it clear that the safety of seafarers was the prime concern. 

Thirdly, he talked about people. He discussed developing synergy between the representatives of the member states at the IMO, and further talked about transparently running the agency, engaging with all stakeholders, and building a diverse team.

He then moved on to discuss improving the public image and awareness of shipping. He highlighted that shipping was the one sector that had kept going throughout the Covid epidemic – but noted the detrimental effect on seafarers, some of whom were not able to leave their ships and return home for two years.

“No ships? No shops! No shopping!”

The importance of seafarers was an important theme throughout, and by the end of the press conference, it had crystallised into the phrase “No ships? No shops! No shopping!”.

Quite apart from the idiosyncratic suggestion on how to solve the Red Sea crisis, the question-and-answer session was interesting and even entertaining.

Most of the questions from the general and environmental press had a decidedly apocalyptic tinge.

Unsurprisingly, questions on the Red Sea popped up from the start. What is the IMO doing about it? Dominguez had already outlined just that, but he reiterated that the agency, among other moves, was engaging regional states on implementing the Djibouti Code of Conduct on suppressing piracy, addressing the UN Security Council, and calling on all ships to implement the industry’s “best management practices to deter piracy”. 

Dominguez further mentioned the option of shipowners placing armed teams on their vessels. One reporter interpreted that to mean that the IMO was recommending carrying armed teams – he was put right on that one.

The press would have come away with no doubt that IMO sees the crisis as threatening freedom of navigation and thus world trade. And some super-high freight rates were bandied about.

Then a reporter implied that the IMO was woefully slow in moving towards decarbonisation, and seemed to suggest that shipping would be responsible for a four or five-degree increase in global temperatures. Again, that was handled well. As with most of his responses, Dominguez outlined progress so far and also stressed that the decarbonisation strategy was subject to continual review.

Another question implicitly criticising the IMO concerned the Hong Kong Convention on ship recycling. Why was it taking so long to come into force, and why were ships still being beached for scrapping at, it was asserted, terrible environmental and human costs?

Dominguez, again, patiently explained how the IMO has to work, and noted the possibility of amending the convention after it enters into force next year. He also gently pointed out that the main shipbreaking states needed to be involved in the process.

The shipping journalists did get a few questions in. I asked how confident Dominguez was that a pricing mechanism to boost the use of alternative fuels could be agreed upon. He pointed to five proposals currently under consideration, with a decision possible at an October meeting.

Coincidentally, the next day the International Chamber of Shipping circulated “a detailed proposal to the UN IMO for a Zero Emission Shipping Fund to accelerate the transition to net zero by 2050”.

One question that probably baffled most reporters in the room was on the Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) which underpins IMO’s decarbonisation strategy. I have found the CII difficult to understand, but one industry insider told me last week that ships diverting around Africa – and spending an additional week or so emitting CO2 – had a better CII than those using the Suez Canal.

Whatever the truth of that, the CII is widely seen in the shipping industry as having been rushed and botched. So the question was – will the CII be reviewed? That got a straightforward answer – yes, by 2026.

Overall, Dominguez made it clear that transparency is now the order of the day at the IMO, and that there would be more press conferences in the future. I’ll be there – it’s worth it just for the sandwiches.