Pirates

[chrisdef]

Not quite what I said, ChrisDef....although very close. You left out my call to protect the Somali fishery against significant ravages by foreign fleets. I rather suspect that would fall within the context of "help" for Somalia. And, of course, there have already been massive efforts to brring aid to tthe Somali's for both instant needs and for a future based on peaceful development. It sems that these efforts have just about all foundered on the reefs of warlord-ism.

Yes sorry, the fishery idea certain would help though from what ive read it could take a number of years before the fish stocks came back in sufficient numbers.
And yes the warlords make it very hard to achieve anything which is why something bigger needs to be done. The UN (or anyone) needs to get in there with boots on the ground again, and this time the mandate to do whatever is needed.

My suggestion also hardly falls within the defitniion of "destroying" the country. Specific actions against specific "pirate" communities in a manner which minimizes risk to the inhabitants but which definitively brings home the message that piracy has to stop could very well work.

Targetting any of there major infastructure is certainly destoying part of the country, you commented on roads and ports, 2 quite expensive and important things to plenty of normal law abiding Somali's.
Specific action. Its easy to say but what exactly would you suggest?

As for the US involvement in Iraq as some kind of offset for Somalia, you might want to recall that countries like the US, India, and others made significant effiorts to bring some kind of order through the rule of law and the provision of food and medical aid to Somalia. Remember?

No i ment Iraq was stupid, for money, and not really aimed at helping anyone when countries out there like Somalia who really do have Islamic extremists (as was claimed about Iraq) are ignored.
Yes those countries made efforts but i would hardly call them significant, the effort in Iraq now that was significant.
Im also against "aid" in the traditional sense. Handing out bags of food does nothing to help long term, it basically just makes the population dependent on aid. Ofcourse they need some to stay alive but more important infastructure should be built such as wells to drink and water crops.

Maybe getting rid of all the unfair trade deals on Africa woud also help them too, instead the West would rather profit and give back a tiny portion of that as Aid so they can feel all warm inside.

 

[swerve]

My suggestion also hardly falls within the defitniion of "destroying" the country. Specific actions against specific "pirate" communities in a manner which minimizes risk to the inhabitants but which definitively brings home the message that piracy has to stop could very well work.

As I see it, the biggest problem of this policy is that most of the pirate bases aren't pirate communities. The pirates are a small but heavily armed minority, who intimidate the people they live among. Although others benefit financially from pirate spending, many (including legitimate businessmen, & what local government there is, when it's not in the pocket of the pirates) openly say that the burden the pirates impose is probably greater than the income they bring in. They inhibit the functioning of a normal economy, as well as being very bad neighbours.

Living next door to the Mafia, with no law to help you against them, is no fun. If one of them quarrels with anyone else . . . . .

So there you have it. The communities in which they live don't, in general, have the power to evict the pirates. The pirates are the biggest & best-armed gangs in town. Bombing those towns to convince them to get rid of pirates has little prospect of success.

 

[John Sansom]

As I see it, the biggest problem of this policy is that most of the pirate bases aren't pirate communities. The pirates are a small but heavily armed minority, who intimidate the people they live among. Although others benefit financially from pirate spending, many (including legitimate businessmen, & what local government there is, when it's not in the pocket of the pirates) openly say that the burden the pirates impose is probably greater than the income they bring in. They inhibit the functioning of a normal economy, as well as being very bad neighbours.

Living next door to the Mafia, with no law to help you against them, is no fun. If one of them quarrels with anyone else . . . . .

So there you have it. The communities in which they live don't, in general, have the power to evict the pirates. The pirates are the biggest & best-armed gangs in town. Bombing those towns to convince them to get rid of pirates has little prospect of success.

Both Swerve and ChrisDef have put forward perfectly logical arguments against taking what some may feel is drastic onshore action against the Somali pirates. Still, there comes a time when one really must do something to ensure that some kind of no-nonssense message is finally delivered.

My recommendation was NOT to blow the communities from which the pirates operate out of existence. Rather, I suggested that transportation and communicationm links into and out of those communities be interdicted; that a significant start be made on a Somali fisheries recovery and protection project, and--not said, but hopefully understood--that the Somali "boss" manipulators behind all this discover that their lives and freedom are more than simply "at risk".

And I have no objection to arming merchanmen which must traverse the waters in which the pirates operate, whether it be off the Horn of Africa or in the various East Indian straits. However, that should be a decision of the owners and somewhat contingent on at least a nod from, say, the UN.

I also suspect that international "competing interests" may also be at play here. What they are I can't say with any certainty, but history tells us that things are never really what they appear to be. If my tentative observation is correct, the situation may not lend itself to any really useful resolution. Sorry.

But let's keep the opinions and suggestions coming.

 

[swerve]

My recommendation was NOT to blow the communities from which the pirates operate out of existence. Rather, I suggested that transportation and communicationm links into and out of those communities be interdicted; that a significant start be made on a Somali fisheries recovery and protection project, and--not said, but hopefully understood--that the Somali "boss" manipulators behind all this discover that their lives and freedom are more than simply "at risk"..

It looks to me as if you would hope to simultaneously inhibit the operations of the pirates and take action to increase economic alternatives. I wholeheartedly agree that this is a good strategy. Any differences between us are to do with the tactics to be used.

With regard to communications: to the best of my knowledge, there is no functioning land line telephone system in most of Somalia (anywhere in Somalia?). There are mobile networks in the main settled areas. I think the pirates often operate from locations too poor & remote for terrestrial mobile coverage to have been extended to them, & therefore have to rely on satellite telephones - as do any legitimate businessmen rich enough. I think there are also local equivalents of the Bangladeshi 'telephone ladies', i.e. owners of phone (satphones where there is no normal mobile coverage) who rent them out. Interdiction is therefore difficult.

Transport would be easier to interdict, but not, I would think, by attacks on infrastructure. Local wheeled transport seems to be very much oriented towards robust trucks (e.g. Indian Tata lorries) & 4WDs. Targeting high-end & new 4WDs might kill a lot of pirate money men.

It's been noted that there are now a lot of large new houses, with high walls around them, near the chief pirate centres. It should be possible to identify the houses of pirate bosses, & track their movements, if money & effort was put into intelligence.

 

[John Sansom]

It looks to me as if you would hope to simultaneously inhibit the operations of the pirates and take action to increase economic alternatives. I wholeheartedly agree that this is a good strategy. Any differences between us are to do with the tactics to be used.

With regard to communications: to the best of my knowledge, there is no functioning land line telephone system in most of Somalia (anywhere in Somalia?). There are mobile networks in the main settled areas. I think the pirates often operate from locations too poor & remote for terrestrial mobile coverage to have been extended to them, & therefore have to rely on satellite telephones - as do any legitimate businessmen rich enough. I think there are also local equivalents of the Bangladeshi 'telephone ladies', i.e. owners of phone (satphones where there is no normal mobile coverage) who rent them out. Interdiction is therefore difficult.

Transport would be easier to interdict, but not, I would think, by attacks on infrastructure. Local wheeled transport seems to be very much oriented towards robust trucks (e.g. Indian Tata lorries) & 4WDs. Targeting high-end & new 4WDs might kill a lot of pirate money men.

It's been noted that there are now a lot of large new houses, with high walls around them, near the chief pirate centres. It should be possible to identify the houses of pirate bosses, & track their movements, if money & effort was put into intelligence.

Hi, Swerve....and, yes, you're right about the electronic means of communication....but I'm willing to bet that satphone transmissions can be rendered incomprehensible through the appication of "offshore" electronics. I am by no means an expert in this particular area....but let;'s hear from somebody who is.

As for ground transport, I think the French pointed the way some time ago through the "explosive" interdiction-by-air of a truckload of ransom "notes". Choke points of all kinds can be addressed from the air without any innocent or otherwise casualties. Predators and other remotely operated airborne vehicles can be of demonstrably useful assistance in this respect.

It really would be good to hear from someone with at least a small buckeful of knowledge and expertise in the above areas. Are you out there?:wave

 

[swerve]

As for ground transport, I think the French pointed the way some time ago through the "explosive" interdiction-by-air of a truckload of ransom "notes". Choke points of all kinds can be addressed from the air without any innocent or otherwise casualties. Predators and other remotely operated airborne vehicles can be of demonstrably useful assistance in this.

Yes, I agree that sort of operation is what's needed. The French do seem to be rather good at this sort of thing.

To be effective, it needs very good intelligence. We have to be careful, for example, about paying rewards to people with strong motives to tell lies (e.g. fingering a local rival as a pirate), or we'll end up with lots of lorry-loads of food or innocent travellers, wedding parties, etc. being blown up, which wouldn't do much to make friends & turn people against the pirates.

 

[Juramentado]

Op Ed on Piracy from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime

As noted in this latest Op Ed on the NYT, even the UN fails to understand the engagement effort neccessary to end piracy originating from Somalia:

I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor - The War on Piracy Must Start on Land - NYTimes.com

How does propping up a government that barely controls the capitol of the country a useful step? Director Costa obviously hasn't heard from the other nations in the area; they don't want these pirates no matter how much international subsidy is provided to beefing up their courts and prisons. They can barely keep their own inmates housed and fed, and now you would deliberately inject more potential subversives into their midst? Highly unlikely.

The Maritime Regional Cooperation Strategy outlined in the latest USN NOC 2010 makes more sense. Enable the more stable partners in the region to take on the enforcement roles. But given the political and conflict quagmires that the US is trying to extricate from in SouthWest Asia, none of the powers with naval assets in the region (including the independents like China and Russia) have interest in getting engaged in a long-term ground solution. And that's the only way to really ensure you have law and order is imposed in Somalia.

 

[iceyjo]

Yes, I agree that sort of operation is what's needed. The French do seem to be rather good at this sort of thing.

To be effective, it needs very good intelligence. We have to be careful, for example, about paying rewards to people with strong motives to tell lies (e.g. fingering a local rival as a pirate), or we'll end up with lots of lorry-loads of food or innocent travellers, wedding parties, etc. being blown up, which wouldn't do much to make friends & turn people against the pirates.

The French navy did well in curbing the marauding activities of Somalian pirates. There's ought to be an international cooperation, providing armed navy that are ready to strike these abusive pirates. At the ground, much pressure must be given to governments cuddling these bandits. We could just imagine the trauma, hardships, and the effect when these pirates are left to do their atrocities.

 

[Kilo 2-3]

The French navy did well in curbing the marauding activities of Somalian pirates. There's ought to be an international cooperation, providing armed navy that are ready to strike these abusive pirates. At the ground, much pressure must be given to governments cuddling these bandits. We could just imagine the trauma, hardships, and the effect when these pirates are left to do their atrocities.

Solving the root issue is definitely the preferable option. Unfortunately, it's very, very difficult to do. The UN and the US tried in the past and failed miserably. Somalia is politically unstable, lacks infrastructure, and has massive poverty and food shortages. Traditional methods of foreign aid (food handouts, etc.) won't work simply because distribution is difficult and the fact that corrupt warlords will simply take the aid and use it to further strongarm the people.

There are no governments "cuddling" the pirates, simply because there is little to no rule of law in Somalia to begin with. Besides, "pressure" is very hard to exert when, short of an invasion, you have no means of pressuring them.

Completely ignoring the symptom to go after the disease (something which will take a massive investment of time and capital to cure) is a bad idea. The Somalian pirates need to be deterred and fought, even as we contemplate improving conditions in the impoverished nation itself.

So, how do we do this?

As you noted, international naval task forces are certainly an option. I'd also (suggest the (further) deployment of some air assets (Reapers, GlobalHawks and P-3s) to neighboring regions to keep an eye on the coast. Armed guards on ships are also a possibility; but we'll see how that one pans out.

 

[Juramentado]

Solving the root issue is definitely the preferable option. Unfortunately, it's very, very difficult to do. The UN and the US tried in the past and failed miserably. Somalia is politically unstable, lacks infrastructure, and has massive poverty and food shortages. Traditional methods of foreign aid (food handouts, etc.) won't work simply because distribution is difficult and the fact that corrupt warlords will simply take the aid and use it to further strongarm the people.

There are no governments "cuddling" the pirates, simply because there is little to no rule of law in Somalia to begin with. Besides, "pressure" is very hard to exert when, short of an invasion, you have no means of pressuring them.

Completely ignoring the symptom to go after the disease (something which will take a massive investment of time and capital to cure) is a bad idea. The Somalian pirates need to be deterred and fought, even as we contemplate improving conditions in the impoverished nation itself.

So, how do we do this?

As you noted, international naval task forces are certainly an option. I'd also (suggest the (further) deployment of some air assets (Reapers, GlobalHawks and P-3s) to neighboring regions to keep an eye on the coast. Armed guards on ships are also a possibility; but we'll see how that one pans out.

A couple of interesting proposals have emerged from the younger generation of naval officers in the ranks as they approach "mid-management," i.e., 04-05 LCDR, CDR tiers. Disruption of networks - a lot of piracy relies upon technology - if there was a way to somehow disrupt their communications networks (mostly satphones) and reliance upon GPS, it would hamper their operations. How much would remain to be seen. Another is to conduct distrust and influence operations - either soft or hard.

Soft would be your traditional PsyOps - leaflets mixed in with food shipments, trying to separate the population from the pirate clans. Or somehow getting one of the clans to appear as if they're getting a larger apportionment of the ransoms than the others.

Hard could be limited SOF such as ambushing pirates on the coast or in-land and making it look like the work of another clan or one of the several criminal organizations in the area . There are 56 defined clans after all, and not everyone gets along with everyone else.

In the short term, it might also be worth letting the UIC prevail since they consider piracy to be anathema to their ideals. However, that's a double-edged sword - ignoring the rise of the UIC could lead to the successful establishment of Islamic fundamentalism in the HOA, a larger problem than piracy.

 

[OPSSG]

221-Strong SAF Task Group Leaves for Gulf of Aden

18 Jun 2010 - For the second time, the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) has dispatched a task group in support of international efforts to counter piracy in the Gulf of Aden. Participating in the three-month deployment is the Republic of Singapore Navy Landing Ship Tank (LST), RSS Endurance, with two Republic of Singapore Air Force Super Puma helicopters on board. Led by Colonel Tan Kai Cheong, Commanding Officer 191 Squadron, the SAF task group consists of 221 personnel from the Army, Navy and Air Force. The SAF task group will operate under the ambit of the multinational Combined Task Force (CTF) 151 to undertake operations to deter and disrupt piracy activities in the Gulf of Aden....

From January to April 2010, Rear Adm. Bernard Miranda, Republic of Singapore Navy, served as commander of CTF-151. This deployment of the RSS Endurance is part of Singapore's commitment to CTF-151, which is currently under the command of Rear Adm. Beom Rim Lee of the Republic of Korea Navy (to whom Rear Adm. Bernard Miranda handed over command at the end of April).

Earlier, in May 2010, Rear Adm. Beom Rim Lee, Commander, CTF 151, also met with Russian Navy Captain First Rank Ildar F. Ahmerov, onboard the Russian warship RFN Marshal Shaposhnikov (BPK 543), to discuss mutual cooperation between the two. CTF 151 and the Russian Navy are conducting counter-piracy operations in the Somali Basin and Gulf of Aden.

 

[brazenballs]

just a few days ago there was an article about the U.S having to board a pirate ship

i wonder what weapons are available to pirate anything stronger than rpgs maybe some 30mm guns or mines?

pirates dont use such heavy weoponary.dey stick to their ak's and rpgs.dey dont even need heavy weopons cuz usually d target ship is unarmed

[Mod edit]Please write in ENGLISH. [/Mod edit]

 

[OPSSG]

Hijacking of MV Golden Blessing in the Gulf of Aden

In the early hours of 28 June, pirates took control of the MV Golden Blessing approximately 90 nautical miles off the northern Somali coast. On notification from the Master of the MV Golden Blessing that pirates were on board, the EU NAVFOR German warship Schleswig-Holstein immediately launched their helicopter and reported sighting suspected pirates on board the MV Golden Blessing.

The MV Golden Blessing, a Singapore flagged tanker with deadweight of 14,445 tonnes, was carrying a cargo of glycoethelen. The MV Golden Blessing has a crew of 19 Chinese; there are no reports of injuries. The vessel is under pirate control and is now moving towards the Somali Coast. EU NAVFOR is monitoring.

EU NAVFOR Somalia – Operation ATALANTA’s main tasks are to escort merchant vessels carrying humanitarian aid of the ‘World Food Program’ (WFP) and vessels of AMISOM, and to protect vulnerable ships in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean and to deter and disrupt piracy. EUNAVFOR also monitors fishing activity off the coast of Somalia.

According to the BBC the MV Golden Blessing is a Singapore flagged petroleum and chemical tanker and was travelling to India from Saudi Arabia when it was hijacked. Singapore's Maritime and Port Authority's press release is here and it has details of the bareboat charter to Shanghai Dingheng Shipping Co Ltd.

 

[John Sansom]

According to the BBC the MV Golden Blessing is a Singapore flagged petroleum and chemical tanker and was travelling to India from Saudi Arabia when it was hijacked. Singapore's Maritime and Port Authority's press release is here and it has details of the bareboat charter to Shanghai Dingheng Shipping Co Ltd.

Thanks, OPSSG...and thanks also to Juramentado who echoed some of my sentiments from an earlier post. I took it a wee bit further, though, suggesting the use of seaborne aircraft to interdict inland routes at naturally occurring choke points.

I'm not too sure that the exacerbation of inter-clan rivalries would work to the point that these groups turn on each other because I rather think the situation has gone somewhat beyond that.
But, hey, I'm no expert....and if the idea has potential it should at the very least have a test run or two.

 

[Locarnus]

Sophisticated gibberish

I read quite some part of the thread but either I missed some basic
information, or they were not provided.

1. Who are the players and what are their interests?

After answering that primary question you can choose a player,
or an interest group and define for them and, because of the
interdependencies, for the others as well:
(Of course you can also state your own interests but then it becomes
somewhat fictional)

2. What are the goals to be achieved?
ie desired situation ex post, timeframe, priorization of goals aso...
3. What are the restrictions?
ie limitations on means to use, politically, financially aso...
4. Which assumptions are made?
eg growth of traffic, information availability aso...

Then formulate a strategy and the means necessary to conduct it,
with reactions and counterreactions of the other active players.

This list can go on, but without even those basics its just
sophisticated gibberish.

Cant wait for the first one to state "the end of piracy in this region"
as an interest for everyone except the pirates or something similar.

If you do so, prove it!

Identify a player and state the pros and cons of this status ex post
for this particular player (all pros and cons, not just the ones you
like the player to have or to consider). Also state the restrictions
and assumptions if necessary/appropriate.

Then repeat it for every player you claim the goal to be valid for.
Lets see if it can be done for an active player,
not for a passive one like some "general public" or the ships crews.


"If one does not know to which port one is sailing, no wind is favorable."
Seneca

While keeping the intention you can adjust this to the circumstances, eg:
"If you dont know which goal to achieve, no mean/toy/weapon/whatever is useful."

 

[John Sansom]

I read quite some part of the thread but either I missed some basic
information, or they were not provided.

1. Who are the players and what are their interests?

After answering that primary question you can choose a player,
or an interest group and define for them and, because of the
interdependencies, for the others as well:
(Of course you can also state your own interests but then it becomes
somewhat fictional)

2. What are the goals to be achieved?
ie desired situation ex post, timeframe, priorization of goals aso...
3. What are the restrictions?
ie limitations on means to use, politically, financially aso...
4. Which assumptions are made?
eg growth of traffic, information availability aso...

Then formulate a strategy and the means necessary to conduct it,
with reactions and counterreactions of the other active players.

This list can go on, but without even those basics its just
sophisticated gibberish.

Cant wait for the first one to state "the end of piracy in this region"
as an interest for everyone except the pirates or something similar.

If you do so, prove it!

Identify a player and state the pros and cons of this status ex post
for this particular player (all pros and cons, not just the ones you
like the player to have or to consider). Also state the restrictions
and assumptions if necessary/appropriate.

Then repeat it for every player you claim the goal to be valid for.
Lets see if it can be done for an active player,
not for a passive one like some "general public" or the ships crews.


"If one does not know to which port one is sailing, no wind is favorable."
Seneca

While keeping the intention you can adjust this to the circumstances, eg:
"If you dont know which goal to achieve, no mean/toy/weapon/whatever is useful."

Sorry, Locarnus.... but the entire thread is predicated on the need to eradicate piracy in the region and, for that matter, in places like the Straits of Malacca.

I re-read the thread and could find no "sophisticated gibberish"--an expression which may say more about the user than about the observed commentary. What I did find was some useful information; some good ideas; some generalized expressions of thought, andf some solid on-point suggestions. Sorry...no "sophisticated gibberish".

All of the above helps (and helped) thread participants to feel their way into this situation and to increase their own knowledge of the subtleties involved. But thanks anyway for breaking down an approach mechanism.....but prove what?:dance

 

[Locarnus]

Sorry, Locarnus.... but the entire thread is predicated on the need to eradicate piracy in the region and, for that matter, in places like the Straits of Malacca.

I re-read the thread and could find no "sophisticated gibberish"--an expression which may say more about the user than about the observed commentary. What I did find was some useful information; some good ideas; some generalized expressions of thought, andf some solid on-point suggestions. Sorry...no "sophisticated gibberish".

All of the above helps (and helped) thread participants to feel their way into this situation and to increase their own knowledge of the subtleties involved. But thanks anyway for breaking down an approach mechanism.....but prove what?:dance

So the thread is about:

"What can be done if everyone, except the pirates, wanted to eradicate piracy, given available info, tech and maybe financial restrictions"

Until someone tries to prove that this is a possible real-world goal it stays to be a semi-fictional thread ("fictional" because of the goal, "semi" because of the real world contraints for this goal).

Until this is done it is the same category as a thread like
"What navy should Iran build if it wants to invade New Zealand, given available info, tech and maybe financial restrictions"
Sounds a bit ridiculous and the content may be described as sophisticated gibberish. But why is that one ridiculous and the other is not, ie where is the difference?
Is it the feasibility? Or is it that you believe/assume, that it does not fit into the matrix of possible intentions/goals of Iran?

If this piracy thread is like that, I have no problem with it.
If it is different, prove it.

I have no problem with sophisticated gibberish, I also like to do it. The problem arises, if it is pretended to be more than that.

I think there are a lot of good ideas, concepts aso in this thread, regarding the piracy situation, so I would hate to see them being stranded in some semi fictional thread.

 

[John Sansom]

So the thread is about:

"What can be done if everyone, except the pirates, wanted to eradicate piracy, given available info, tech and maybe financial restrictions"

Until someone tries to prove that this is a possible real-world goal it stays to be a semi-fictional thread ("fictional" because of the goal, "semi" because of the real world contraints for this goal).

Until this is done it is the same category as a thread like
"What navy should Iran build if it wants to invade New Zealand, given available info, tech and maybe financial restrictions"
Sounds a bit ridiculous and the content may be described as sophisticated gibberish. But why is that one ridiculous and the other is not, ie where is the difference?
Is it the feasibility? Or is it that you believe/assume, that it does not fit into the matrix of possible intentions/goals of Iran?

If this piracy thread is like that, I have no problem with it.
If it is different, prove it.

I have no problem with sophisticated gibberish, I also like to do it. The problem arises, if it is pretended to be more than that.

I think there are a lot of good ideas, concepts aso in this thread, regarding the piracy situation, so I would hate to see them being stranded in some semi fictional thread.

If one were to take a practical and immediate asessment of Iran and the Somali-based pirates, it would not be difficult to conclude that Iran stands to benefit from the situation as it now stands....even if only minimally. After all, anything that diverts one's adversaries from oneself cannot help but be a proverbial "good thing". But to the skipper and crew of, say, a tanker facing fast skiffs with well-armed crews of their own, the contemplation of Iranian intentions is pretty much an esoteric exercise at best.

Ditto armed legitimate naval vessels in the area. The bottom line is the need to put a stop to the immediate actions and to do so in such a way that others are very much encouraged not to follow suit. These "others" would include the on-shore manipulators and ransom organizers.

All of this is up to the policy devisers who have the authority to call the shots. What we (and not just those on this thread) need to do is to encourage some cohesive and useful policy-making.:smash

 

[gf0012-aust]

It would be a good idea for new members (Locarnus) to read the forum rules while this post is closed.

Input such as "sophisticated rubbish" does nothing to engender co-operative dialogue with members who have taken a considered approach in their responses. You may disagree with their view, but trivialising their responses by using smug lines is not the best way to further debate.

A couple of the people in here have direct experience in either track managing pirates, engaging them, protecting unarmed vessels and or have done VBSS - so they certainly have direct experience in the things that matter - to them.

direct experience (as some have in here) furthers academic debate - especially when they aren't preaching.

it behooves all to read into the responses beyond the emotive of how perfect they think the solution may be.