As I have stated in previous posts, the US Navy TOOK COMMAND of the situation and set up the pirates. I will not go through the whole rigmarole yet again. If anyone here is actually serious about discussing this situation, lets cover it is a part at a time, not some ridiculous, long winded manifesto.
In case I have not made it clear in my previous post, what the US did in the hijacking of Maersk Alabama is irrelevant as that situation is completely different to the recent hijacking of the Chinese vessel.
Now, I believe I have asked you to provide evidences that support your statements regarding 1) the abilities of Chinese naval commanders and 2) the distance of the hijacked ship to the Chinese task force. If you are serious in participating in discussion, then let see some supporting arguments from your side. Otherwise, your silence only means you acknowledge that your statements are pure conjectures.
As I said previously, lets debate subjects point by point.
Then let see some evidences supporting your assertions.
The links are supporting arguments for location of ships; authority to chase down pirates on Somali waters and land, and the China Daily website that has not mentioned the De Xin Hai hijacking since October 22.
The links you have provided do not support your argument regarding the distance between the ship and the task force in any manner. Again, I shall refer to this site:
The site contains a map showing the location where the ship was first hijacked. As one can see, the distance between the ship and the mouth of the gulf is actually longer than the distance between the ship and the coast. This contradicts your claim that the distance between the ship and the coast is equal to that between the ship and the task force.
My critique of Chinese naval tactics is that they lost a valuable opportunity in not taking control of the situation. If the Chinese ships immediately raced down the Somali coast, they stood a good chance, albeit a slim one, but a chance non-the-less, to deny the hijacked ship access to the pirates liar.
What kind of double talk is this? A good chance, but slim? :roll:
The task force, being in escort duty at the time of the attack, made the correct decision in staying with the ships being escorted. An attempt to reach the ship 1000 nm away would not only be fruitless, but expose the ships under escort to other possible pirates attack.
If you cannot see this simple fact, then quite frankly you are in no position to judge the actions of Chinese naval commanders.
By allowing the hijacked ship to rule events by going to shore, it will now be a extremely long and difficult situation to free not only the ship, but also the hostages, which will be dispersed deep into the hinterlands of a lawless state. The Somali pirates now have little to fear from a Chinese Navy as long as they keep changing tactics and move quicker than the Chinese naval bureaucracy.
I failed to see how Chinese naval bureaucracy is in anyway relevant to the discussion at hands.
The escorting of convoys is a multinational one, that means there are SEVERAL multi-national ships in the area that can easily plug the gap. The reason all those warships are there is to protect shipping from pirates. Their mission does not say, "Oh, if a pirate is on the other side of this line then ignore it.".
First of all, the prevention of commercial vessels from being attacked by pirates is the multinational effort. Escorting convoys is an unilateral act from the Chinese government. There is no naval vessels in the escort other than those from the Chinese.
Secondly, you are correct in pointing out that there are all those warships (from different nations) in the area. So why has the US Navy not race to the rescue of the hijacked Chinese vessel? Following your logic, this would definitely constitute as incompetence on the part of US naval commanders, illustrating their failures at quick-thinking, showing initiatives, and taking control of the situation.
What is not professional is not adapting to unforeseen circumstances. So if a Chinese ship was ordered to guard a harbor on point A, while an enemy attack at point B only a few miles away, by your logic, it would "abandoning your post" if that ship went to aid in the "B" battle.
This argument is totally flawed in that the ship that was hijacked was not just "miles away" from the Chinese task force, rather it was some 1000 nm away.
Therein lies the difference between US policy and Chinese policy. Americans would most likely adapt to the situation and take initiative and not wait for orders and join the B battle. The Chinese, it seems, would sit still, since that was their orders.
If you think robotic control is a good thing in a tactical environment, you are entitled to that belief.
On really? This is very interesting indeed!
If you are correct, than given the fact that B is some 1000 nm away, the Somali pirates would have little to fear from the US Navy as long as they move quicker than your bureaucracy -- attack point B when the US ships are at point A, and attack point A when US ships are at point B. If US Naval commanders really do that, then they must be the most incompetent naval commanders ever.
That being said, the abilities of US naval commanders are unquestionable, thus I believe that they will make the same correct decision as their Chinese counterpart -- by not abandoning the escort mission and put more ships at risk of pirate attacks.
As I have stated earlier, this is a point where we agree to disagree. I stated my belief that the commander on site is the individual best suited to make decisions on the spot, be it 1 foot away or 26,000 miles away. I know US commanders can make those decisions on the spot because I was there when they did, and yes, deviations of thousands of miles. Of course the commander can inform his command, and the command can likewise tell him to abort and head back, but it is the commander that decides what is best at that moment. If he makes the wrong choice, he can be punished for it.
I understand where you are coming from, but this is a difference between US command and Chinese command.
Of course you can disagree all you like. Nobody is preventing you from doing that. However, different of opinions does not in anyway prove your assertions are correct.
