Somali Pirates and their derring-do have been all over the news lately. They hijacked an oil tanker as long as an aircraft carrier! They’ve turned the Somali port of Eyl into the “New Tortuga,” swarming with pirate accountants in business suits and pirate negotiators in land rovers! And, of course, they make excellent husbands.

But do you know what’s scarier than pirates? Asylum! That’s right: the Times of London reported last week that the Royal Navy has ordered its ships not to intervene against the pirates because it fears that any captured Somalis would be entitled to claim asylum in the UK.

Just to be clear: that’s ridiculous.

First of all, pirates are clearly not eligible for asylum. Under Article 1(F) of the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees, (to which the UK is a state party), any individual who has committed a serious non-political crime is not eligible for asylum. So unless the Royal Navy thinks that these guys are engaging in piracy in order to protest Somalia’s utter lack of a ruling regime, it’s hard to see how asylum would be on the table. (Just kidding -it still wouldn’t be. Committing a regular old crime for political reasons doesn’t make it a political crime.)

And even if it were, are you kidding me, Royal Navy? You are arguing that it would be worse to arrest, try, punish, and then grant asylum to pirates than to simply allow them to continue merrily a-pirating? Seriously? You know that all “granting asylum” means is that they get to stay in your country instead of returning to one that would persecute them, right? That they don’t get any additional licenses to eat babies or choose a bride from amongst your princesses or insist that “football” is a game played with hands, helmets, and an oblong ball made of pigskin? Really? You are so paralytically afraid of the duties for which you signed up under international humanitarian law that you refuse to take any action at all whatsoever? That is just lame.

I have always found the British fear of asylum seekers baffling. It is completely out of step with the relatively low levels of anti-immigrant sentiment, and is shockingly virulent. When my fiancé ran the London marathon for the charity Refugee Action several years ago, his mother begged him not to say so on his running jersey lest onlookers throw rocks at him. (Don’t worry -he runs faster than a speeding rock.) The Royal Navy’s statement was probably just an outgrowth of that strange persepective. I presume that the conversation went something like this:

Naval Officer 1: Good gosh, old bean! Seems as though we might be having a bit of bother here in the Gulf of Aden.

Naval Officer 2: Too right! Load of old tosh, this piracy bollocks is. Why, do you know, they actually fired shots across my bow this morning?

Naval Officer 1: They never!

Naval Officer 2: They did! I mean, if this keeps up we’ll be expected to actually do something about it.

Naval Officer 1: Mmm, don’t much like the sound of that. I’ve just begun a game of bridge, you see. It’s going quite well, and I’d hate to see it interrupted by open combat.

Naval Officer 2: Completely understand, old bean, completely. We’ll just have to come up with some consequence so horrendously scary that no one will allow us to engage the pirates. You know, something completely unimaginably awful. Like that they would make us all into zombies, or something like that.

Naval Officer 1: No, it has to be something scarier than zombies. No one takes them seriously since Shawn of the Dead.

Naval Officer 1: I’ve got it! Asylum! Nothing scarier than an asylum seeker!

Naval Officer 2: Brilliant! Now, where have I put those blasted scones…?