Modern Piracy on the High Seas

[Lion]

Off topic abit.

Why not armed all ship with fire arms? Somalia piracy problem will be solved.

I know some ships are carrying dangerous but those pirates are arm with explosive too. They gonna blow up ship anyway. Why not take a 50/50 chances if u are arm too. Remember how the chinese crew of a ship fight off a group of pirate? If the crew are arm with heavy machine gun. I bet the pirate will not even of the slight chances to get near the ship.

If the US ship and french one are armed with M60 machine gun or GPMG. I serious think those somalia pirate has not chance of boarding the ship and the rescue of hostage will never happen.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Re: How do you solve a problem like Somalia?

What I've read is that they don't arm ships because it would complicate situations tremendously that would increase the danger to the crew especially if they fail to fend off the pirates.

 

[bd popeye]

ff was correct. So I established a piracy thread. Please discuss issues of piracy in this thread.

Keep the discussion on a civil tone.

Piracy...

Why does it exist?
How to combat piracy?
What is the force behind piracy?
Should merchant ships be allowed to be armed if traveling in pirate infested waters?

And don't forget about the Thai pirates. I think they are still in operation...

Fresh off the news wires...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

NAIROBI, Kenya – NATO warships and helicopters pursued Somali pirates for seven hours after they attacked a Norwegian tanker, NATO spokesmen said Sunday, and the high-speed chase only ended when warning shots were fired at the pirates' skiff.

Seven pirates attempted to attack the Norwegian-flagged MV Front Ardenne late Saturday but fled after crew took evasive maneuvers and alerted warships in the area, said Portuguese Lt. Cmdr. Alexandre Santos Fernandes, aboard a warship in the Gulf of Aden, and Cmdr. Chris Davies, of NATO's maritime headquarters in England.

"How the attack was thwarted is unclear, it appears to have been the actions of the tanker," Davies said. Fernandes said no shots were fired at the tanker.

Davies said the pirates sailed into the path of the Canadian warship Winnipeg, which was escorting a World Food Program delivery ship through the Gulf of Aden. The American ship USS Halyburton was also in the area and joined the chase.

"There was a lengthy pursuit, over seven hours," Davies said.

The pirates hurled weapons into the dark seas as the Canadian and U.S. warships closed in. The ships are part of NATO's anti-piracy mission.

"The skiff abandoned the scene and tried to escape to Somali territory," Fernandes said. "It was heading toward Bossaso we managed to track them ... warning shots have been made after several attempts to stop the vessel."

Both ships deployed helicopters, and naval officers hailed the pirates over loudspeakers and finally fired warning shots to stop them, Fernandes said, but not before the pirates had dumped most of their weapons overboard. NATO forces boarded the skiff, where they found a rocket-propelled grenade, and interrogated, disarmed and released the pirates.

The pirates cannot be prosecuted under Canadian law because they did not attack Canadian citizens or interests and the crime was not committed on Canadian territory.

"When a ship is part of NATO, the detention of person is a matter for the national authorities," Fernandes said. "It stops being a NATO issue and starts being a national issue."

The pirates' release underscores the difficulties navies have in fighting rampant piracy off the coast of lawless Somalia. Most of the time foreign navies simply disarm and release the pirates they catch due to legal complications and logistical difficulties in transporting pirates and witnesses to court.

Pirates have attacked more than 80 boats this year alone, four times the number assaulted in 2003, according to the Kuala Lumpur-based International Maritime Bureau. They now hold at least 18 ships — including a Belgian tanker seized Saturday with 10 crew aboard — and over 310 crew hostage, according to an Associated Press count.

___

Associated Press writer David Stringer in London contributed to this report.

 

[Jeff Head]

The pirates' release underscores the difficulties navies have in fighting rampant piracy off the coast of lawless Somalia. Most of the time foreign navies simply disarm and release the pirates they catch due to legal complications and logistical difficulties in transporting pirates and witnesses to court.

What? Catch and release for pirates?

IMHO, simply crazy. The skiff should simply have been blown out of the water as an abject message to all other pirates.

I believe that mixed signals like this will not deter the pirates. They need to know that everytime they come out on the high seas and attempt to accost and hijack a vessel, that quick and violent death awaits them.

Then, as intelligence positively identifies pirate groups (and perhaps the warlords that support them) on shore, the mother ships of those groups need to be destroyed in place, and (as long as positive, clear ID is established) the facilities of those pirates and warlords need to also be destroyed.

We may not be able to help the overall situation in places like Somalia. Sometimes you cannot solve every problem. It is very difficult to "build nations" where people and their factions do not want to be "built". But we ceretainly can remove any incentive to take to the high seas in piracy for those people in such circumstances.

 

[bladerunner]

What? Catch and release for pirates?
But we ceretainly can remove any incentive to take to the high seas in piracy for those people in such circumstances.

If I remember correctly Sampan Viking questioned the overuse of ordnances as a fix for the problem. WEeall know what's wrong with Somalia, but it appears that nobody/country/UN, are prepared to take the necessary steps.
What countries like Somalia require are measures like the UN took to manage the Congo after Belgium left.

 

[Jeff Head]

If I remember correctly Sampan Viking questioned the overuse of ordnances as a fix for the problem. WEeall know what's wrong with Somalia, but it appears that nobody/country/UN, are prepared to take the necessary steps.
What countries like Somalia require are measures like the UN took to manage the Congo after Belgium left.

No over use necessary. Just judicious and direct use whenever pirates are caught in the act of trying to violently take ships and hostages.

...and then that same judicious use when pirate bastions and the bastions of those who support them have been clearly and positively identified.

Somalia is a very difficult circumstance. Certainly efforts have been, should, and are being made to help those who want help. But that does not mean the problem will necessarily be solved in the near term.

In the mean time, protection of free passage on the high seas can be and ought to be maintained against the criminals who would halt it and would hold people and vessels in deadly peril for ramson.

 

[Scratch]

The legal issues navies in those waters face are a real problem, they hinder proper prosecution and deterrance. Unfortunately, not all nations have an accord with another country like Kenya to transfer the pirates to.
I wonder if not even an international court can come into play here, as this really is an international problem.

 

[AssassinsMace]

This would be interesting to see if this happens.

Ron Paul's plan to fend off pirates
By: Erika Lovley
April 15, 2009 04:16 AM EST

A little-known congressional power could help the federal government keep the Somali pirates in check — and possibly do it for a discount price.

Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) and a growing number of national security experts are calling on Congress to consider using letters of marque and reprisal, a power written into the Constitution that allows the United States to hire private citizens to keep international waters safe.

Used heavily during the Revolution and the War of 1812, letters of marque serve as official warrants from the government, allowing privateers to seize or destroy enemies, their loot and their vessels in exchange for bounty money.

The letters also require would-be thrill seekers to post a bond promising to abide by international rules of war.

In a YouTube video earlier this week, Paul suggested lawmakers consider issuing letters, which could relieve American naval ships from being the nation’s primary pirate responders — a free-market solution to make the high seas safer for cargo ships.

“I think if every potential pirate knew this would be the case, they would have second thoughts because they could probably be blown out of the water rather easily if those were the conditions,” Paul said.

Theoretically, hiring bounty hunters would also be a cheaper option.

National security experts estimate that this week’s ship captain rescue by Navy SEALs cost tens of millions, although a Navy spokesman says the military cannot confirm the exact cost of the mission.

Instead, privateers would be incentivized to patrol the ocean looking for key targets — and money would be paid only to the contractor who completed the job.

“If we have 100 American wanna-be Rambos patrolling the seas, it’s probably a good way of getting the job done,” said Competitive Enterprise Institute senior fellow and security expert Eli Lehrer. “Right now we have a Navy designed mostly to fight other navies. The weapons we have are all excellent, but they may not be the best ones to fight these kinds of pirates. The only cost under letters of marque would be some sort of bounty for the pirates.”

According to Senate historians, Congress hasn’t issued a letter of marquee since the War of 1812, but the Confederate States of America issued them during the Civil War to deliver supplies behind enemy lines. There are also some indications that a letter was granted to a flying band of armed civilians during World War II to operate the Resolute, a Goodyear Blimp used to patrol the ocean for enemy submarines, but the issuance isn’t apparent in the Congressional Record.

If Congress were to revisit the antiquated process, a serious makeover would be required.

In the past, privateers were allowed to keep the ship and treasure they captured in an enemy encounter.

“That isn’t a viable way of funding in today’s world,” said Lehrer. “These pirates don’t really have treasure chests, and their money is tied up in Swiss Bank accounts. Congress would probably have to attach sizable bounties to people.”

Bounties are not a new idea — there is still a $25 million bounty on Osama bin Laden, and millions have been awarded by the government for other enemy captures.




The U.S. State Department earlier this month put a $5 million bounty on the head of the top Pakistani Taliban leader, and even local police departments use rewards to solve cold cases.

University of Oregon economics professor Bill Harbaugh argues the setup could potentially work better than some of the United States’ relationships with modern-day security contractors.

“Obviously, this is somewhat like the contract the government had with Blackwater, except we forgot the bond part of the contract, he said. “If Congress had used this contract from 1776, it would have been more sophisticated than the one they issued with Blackwater.”

Harbaugh’s fifth great-grandfather, Silas Talbot, worked as an early privateer for the United States in 1780 after serving in the Revolutionary War. His letter of marque shows he set out with 12 carriage guns and a crew of 50 men to attack and seize cargo ships coming from Great Britain on the high seas.

Could it really work again?

“It may work in the sense that if you give people incentives to fight piracy, you’ll see more action taken against it,” said Andrew Grotto, a senior national security analyst with the Center for American Progress. “The ocean is huge and, practically speaking, there’s no way the Navy can prevent piracy; it’s too big. But just given the experience in Iraq with private contractors, that effort showcases the difficulties dealing with folks who aren’t answerable to anyone but shareholders.”

But Paul has already thought through a number of these updates.

Days after Sept. 11, Paul introduced legislation allowing President Bush to allow private citizens to go after Osama bin Laden and other identified terrorists and put a bounty price on the heads of targets responsible for the New York attacks. Contractors would also be required to post a play-by-the-rules bond and turn over any terrorists — and their seized property —to U.S. authorities.

“The Constitution gives Congress the power to issue letters of marque and reprisal when a precise declaration of war is impossible due to the vagueness of the enemy,” Paul wrote in a press release. “Once letters of marque and reprisal are issued, every terrorist is essentially a marked man.”

But national security experts and legal analysts warn that applying a colonial-era policy to a modern-day problem could be wrought with legal pitfalls that the Founding Fathers never encountered.

If bounty hunters chase pirates into territorial coastal waters or on to the shore of another country, the problem would fall under the jurisdiction of that country. And any plundering activity that takes place in coastal waters is no longer considered piracy, according to College of William and Mary national security law professor Linda Malone.

Not to mention that there’s also no clear indication where and how the captured pirates should be prosecuted.

“You have to find a stable court system nearby to have them tried for these offenses, but that can be quite complicated,” Malone said. “The fact that the pirates are from Somalia doesn’t make them state actors. They are doing this for private gain.”

And how to determine exactly who is a pirate — and what constitutes pirate activity — could get fuzzy.

“What happens when a ship flying under Congress accidentally takes out an aid ship bound for Somalia?” Grotto said. “At what time does an act seem pirate-like enough to cross the line? Do we really want these snap judgments being made on the fly in waters thousands of miles away from Washington? This is not Johnny Depp we’re dealing with.”

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

 

[pla101prc]

Re: How do you solve a problem like Somalia?

How does it remind you of the rebellion? What sort of parallels are there?

first of all, lets agree on the fact that no one is actually trying to solve the problem. China is there because they want a greater military influence, and maybe Hu Jintao wants to establish a firm bond and control with the military. the US couldve solved the hostage crisis by negotiation, but obama chose to make things big by killing the pirates because he wanted to glorify himself through a "military victory" to get media attention off the economy for a moment, and to gain more support and prestige among the ppl and within the government and the military. canada is there because the US is there...

boxer rebellion and these pirates stuff are non-governmental activities in a weak state. the government cant do anything about them, and as they are "threatening the interests of other states" they become their target. it'd look more like a boxer rebellion if the pirates actually gets pissed enough to fight back in an organized manner...i doubt that'll happen though.

 

[Scratch]

Re: How do you solve a problem like Somalia?

... the US couldve solved the hostage crisis by negotiation, ...

The US?? They tried, the pirates could have helped, but refused by not laying down their weapons, releasing the hostage and allow themeselves to be taken into custody. What do you exspect? Make a decission over the value of the hostages life and then pay a price for that life?

Of course currently noone is really interested of solving the route of the problem. The navys are just trying to protect their merchent shipping lines. Maybe with a more efficient way of protection and some ISR the deterrance will become bigger, but the problem is being handled slow because there are other more important once right now.