Piracy Somalia

[My2Cents]

Armed guards are becoming officially accepted by shippers, if not yet by governments.

15 February 2011 -- Shipping Industry Changes Stance on Armed Guards (not a durable link)
Shipping Industry Changes Stance on Armed Guards

The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) is the principal international trade association for shipowners, representing all sectors and trades and about 80% of the world merchant fleet.

ICS - whose Executive Committee comprising representatives of national shipowners’ associations from over 30 countries met in London last week - has decided to clarify its stance on the use of private armed security guards to defend merchant ships against attacks by Somali pirates. ICS members have also identified a vital need for the military to disable the hijacked ‘motherships’ which the pirates are now using to launch attacks throughout much of the Indian Ocean.

ICS Chairman, Spyros M Polemis, explained:

“ICS has had to acknowledge that the decision to engage armed guards, whether military or private, is a decision to be made by the ship operator after due consideration of all of the risks, and subject to the approval of the vessel’s flag state and insurers. The consensus view amongst shipping industry associations remains that, in normal circumstances, private armed guards are not recommended, and are a clear second best to military personnel. However, in view of the current crisis in the Indian Ocean - with over 700 seafarers held hostage and, most recently, a seafarer being executed - ship operators must be able to retain all possible options available to deter attacks and defend their crews against piracy. Many shipping companies have concluded that arming ships is a necessary alternative to avoiding the Indian Ocean completely, which would have a hugely damaging impact on the movement of world trade.

Mr Polemis added:
“The eradication of piracy is the responsibility of governments. Frustratingly, politicians in those nations with the largest military navies in the region show little willingness to increase resources to the extent that would be necessary to have a decisive impact on the problem of piracy. Western governments, at least, appear to give the impression that this otherwise unacceptable situation can somehow be tolerated. Sadly, until we can persuade governments otherwise, the use of armed guards by ships is very likely to continue increasing.”

ICS advises that the shipping industry will meanwhile be looking at all possible options, including alternative routes, which could have a very dramatic effect on transport costs and delivery times. Piracy is already estimated to cost the global economy between US $7-12 billion per year. If increasing numbers of ships decide to divert around the Cape of Good Hope, this will almost certainly have a major impact on inventories and costs throughout the whole supply chain and, most particularly, on the cost of oil. It could also greatly damage the economies of Africa and the Middle East at this very politically delicate time.

 

[Sea Toby]

Its time to end the pirates lucrative trade in hostages and piracy... They have killed way too many hostages, so its time to kill or be killed... We didn't start this war, but we should be able to end it quickly when they realize they won' t gain a red cent...

Institute a total exclusion zone for Somali fishermen outside twenty miles of their coast, and sink any skiff trespassing, day or night... Maybe they can live without law and order, but the rest of the world chooses not to....

James Madison ran for the presidency with this slogan, "Millions for defense, not one red cent for tribute." He was correct almost two hundred years ago, and its still a great policy...

 

[rip]

Armed guards are becoming officially accepted by shippers, if not yet by governments.

The freedom of the seas is a principal that states, we all get to use it and it is denied to none. The simplest way to attack this problem is, if the people of Somalia do not respect other people’s rights to use the Sea, then they will be denied all uses of the sea or every kind.

When a warship is in view they are fisherman, when a warship in not in view that are pirates! The money from these criminal actions trickles down through the entire Somali economy. They do not care about right or wrong, they realized that piracy pays. Deny them all of the uses of the sea of every kind until all of them realize that it no longer pays. Only then will fisherman stay fisherman when the warships are out of sight.

How? Board every small boat within 50 miles of the cost. If they have guns, hang them if they do not sink their boat and return the fisherman to shore. Within six month there will not be any more pirates.

The solution is simple, we have the capacity to do it, all we need is the will.

And don’t give me any spiel about international law. It is a bogus argument.

 

[John Sansom]

The freedom of the seas is a principal that states, we all get to use it and it is denied to none. The simplest way to attack this problem is, if the people of Somalia do not respect other people’s rights to use the Sea, then they will be denied all uses of the sea or every kind.

When a warship is in view they are fisherman, when a warship in not in view that are pirates! The money from these criminal actions trickles down through the entire Somali economy. They do not care about right or wrong, they realized that piracy pays. Deny them all of the uses of the sea of every kind until all of them realize that it no longer pays. Only then will fisherman stay fisherman when the warships are out of sight.

How? Board every small boat within 50 miles of the cost. If they have guns, hang them if they do not sink their boat and return the fisherman to shore. Within six month there will not be any more pirates.

The solution is simple, we have the capacity to do it, all we need is the will.

And don’t give me any spiel about international law. It is a bogus argument.

Have to agree with you, rip. The reality now of a pirate executed group of four hostages tends to more than underline that agreement.

Interestingly, a very significant number of posts on the New York Times site take a pejorative approach to the dead Americans, citing them as reckless, foolish, and even stupid for even attempting a transit of the area. Unbelievable.

Fact is, these were innocents trusting to the established concept of the freedom of the seas. Another fact which seems to be ermerging is the unwillingness of anybody to do anything about this cancerous phenomenon, except to talk about "poor Somali fishermen" without taking into account that the hostages were murdered while conditions for release were being negotiated with the pirates' "financier". So, what's that all about?

Well, perhaps naval units from the US, Russia, Canada, Malaysia, et al should be ordered to shut the "fishing grounds" down, as rip suggested, pending air and ground attacks on key pirate havens with, of course, significant airborne blocking forces in place inland. Of course, that could seriously endanger more than a thousand hostages on shore.

Anybody got a better idea? One that doesn't give in to the scumbags and their wealthy manipulators?

 

[HKP]

Have to agree with you, rip. The reality now of a pirate executed group of four hostages tends to more than underline that agreement.

Interestingly, a very significant number of posts on the New York Times site take a pejorative approach to the dead Americans, citing them as reckless, foolish, and even stupid for even attempting a transit of the area. Unbelievable.

Fact is, these were innocents trusting to the established concept of the freedom of the seas. Another fact which seems to be ermerging is the unwillingness of anybody to do anything about this cancerous phenomenon, except to talk about "poor Somali fishermen" without taking into account that the hostages were murdered while conditions for release were being negotiated with the pirates' "financier". So, what's that all about?

Well, perhaps naval units from the US, Russia, Canada, Malaysia, et al should be ordered to shut the "fishing grounds" down, as rip suggested, pending air and ground attacks on key pirate havens with, of course, significant airborne blocking forces in place inland. Of course, that could seriously endanger more than a thousand hostages on shore.

Anybody got a better idea? One that doesn't give in to the scumbags and their wealthy manipulators?

yes, my better idea is a combination of all. Gather intel and conduct raids and execute and surgical strikes against somali pirate hideouts, suppliers and their support units. Regular aerial surveillance, include navies of wealthy middle eastern countries to patrol both by air and sea. Allow shipping companies to hire armed guards and ask countries involve in these routes to allow ships with armed guards. When a fire fight happens, any available navy patrolling the area close by should respond and provide back up when called upon including air support for the armed guards. Patrolling navy ships should stop and board and inspect suspicious shipping vessels. All identified pirate ships must be confiscated or destroyed if they resist. Ask the UN to assist Somalia create a functioning government with the support from African Union and Middle eastern countries. Once a functioning government is established then a Somali coast guard or small navy can be put up and trained. A no fishing zone can also be designated.

The use of force works. For example, China a few years back had one of its ships hijacked by pirates in Malacca Straights some of the crew were shot and killed by the pirates. Chinese investigators found out that the mastermind and operators were mostly Chinese. All of the suspects were captured and executed. After that execution no Chinese ever ventured in this illegal activity again so far and actually put a dent in piracy in Malacca Straights. Although the close cooperation and intel sharing of Navies of neighboring countries in region also contributed to the reduction of piracy in the Malacca Straights.

 

[My2Cents]

Well, perhaps naval units from the US, Russia, Canada, Malaysia, et al should be ordered to shut the "fishing grounds" down, as rip suggested, pending air and ground attacks on key pirate havens with, of course, significant airborne blocking forces in place inland. Of course, that could seriously endanger more than a thousand hostages on shore.

Anybody got a better idea? One that doesn't give in to the scumbags and their wealthy manipulators?

As said before.:rel

As for the pirates themselves, what is needed is to reestablish the status of piracy as hostis humani generis (Latin for "enemy of mankind") and give formal naval units the necessary legal tools to carry out arrests regardless of jurisdiction or nationality of the victims, followed by a rapid trial and punishment (execution) at sea.

The later part, quick punishment at sea, is particularly important to prevent a process of hostage taking and exchange for captured pirates from being instituted.

 

[riksavage]

The Pirate locations are well known, aerial intelligence clearly shows the profits of piracy in the form of newly built mansions along the Somalia coast. Also the pirate skiffs and mother-ships are all moored together and clearly visible from the air. The easiest approach would be punitive raids against the moored vessels - remove their ability to go to sea.

The problem is some shipping companies with large numbers of assets transiting the pirate play grounds would rather transfer the risk to insurers or self insure, the cost of K&R premiums being less than the cost of hiring armed crews for all their vessels. Plus there is the danger of human and material loss associated with a full-on firefight between the attacker and protector. They accept paying a ransom for one vessel/crew if the other 20+ get through unharmed.

The current plan is to create a PMC manned escort fleet of 18 vessels to operate a convoy system. The benefits being the cost will be spread amongst the convoy and any subsequent firefights will hopefully occur between the escort vessel and the pirates, not a container/LNG tanker and pirates.

Because life is so cheap and the rewards so great for Somali pirates, any attempt to take the pirates on at sea will result in them simply arming themselves with better weapons, shooting first and asking questions later. This is why a strike against their bases is preferable complimented by the convoy approach. A modern warship is overkill, cheaper gunboats manned by PMC personnel offer a cost effective solution (subject to vetting, training and oversight) to an age old problem.

 

[John Sansom]

The Pirate locations are well known, aerial intelligence clearly shows the profits of piracy in the form of newly built mansions along the Somalia coast. Also the pirate skiffs and mother-ships are all moored together and clearly visible from the air. The easiest approach would be punitive raids against the moored vessels - remove their ability to go to sea.

The problem is some shipping companies with large numbers of assets transiting the pirate play grounds would rather transfer the risk to insurers or self insure, the cost of K&R premiums being less than the cost of hiring armed crews for all their vessels. Plus there is the danger of human and material loss associated with a full-on firefight between the attacker and protector. They accept paying a ransom for one vessel/crew if the other 20+ get through unharmed.

The current plan is to create a PMC manned escort fleet of 18 vessels to operate a convoy system. The benefits being the cost will be spread amongst the convoy and any subsequent firefights will hopefully occur between the escort vessel and the pirates, not a container/LNG tanker and pirates.

Because life is so cheap and the rewards so great for Somali pirates, any attempt to take the pirates on at sea will result in them simply arming themselves with better weapons, shooting first and asking questions later. This is why a strike against their bases is preferable complimented by the convoy approach. A modern warship is overkill, cheaper gunboats manned by PMC personnel offer a cost effective solution (subject to vetting, training and oversight) to an age old problem.

There's another important complicating factor at work here. That is, religion and the concept of the jihad translated into direct and violent action.

Yes, there are almost countless fishermen along the Somali coast who have been plagued by the trawlers and factory ships of other nations. And yes, they provide a fertile recruiting ground for the money men who can successfully play on their impoverishment by pulling the levers willingly supplied by the mullahs and al Qaeda-related groups.

So, to what extent can Islam be encouraged to contribute to at least a significant diminishment of these offshore piratical forays....and to the protection of the Somali fisherman's traditional fishing grounds?

I have to admit that I am somewhat pessimistic in this respect, but it's a question that needs some exploration.

And having fruitlessly explored all this to its fullest, then we should probably go down riksavage's road. Simplistic perhaps, but probably, in the end, the only way to handle the situation.:daz

 

[gf0012-aust]

for the australian members on here... how many say the Dateline interviews re the Seychelles and how they're dealing with pirates?

for the non australians.

the seychelles have declared war on pirates, have had the UN fund their legal processes (they've rewritten their common law to deal with it)

at last count they had arrested 31 pirates and they were serving 15 year stints.
the coast guard goes out to find and arrest them (and shoot where necessary)

the seychelles PM also drew a strong link between some of the pirate funding and muslim extremists

 

[swerve]

The freedom of the seas is a principal that states, we all get to use it and it is denied to none. The simplest way to attack this problem is, if the people of Somalia do not respect other people’s rights to use the Sea, then they will be denied all uses of the sea or every kind.

When a warship is in view they are fisherman, when a warship in not in view that are pirates! The money from these criminal actions trickles down through the entire Somali economy. They do not care about right or wrong, they realized that piracy pays. Deny them all of the uses of the sea of every kind until all of them realize that it no longer pays. Only then will fisherman stay fisherman when the warships are out of sight.

How? Board every small boat within 50 miles of the cost. If they have guns, hang them if they do not sink their boat and return the fisherman to shore. Within six month there will not be any more pirates.

The solution is simple, we have the capacity to do it, all we need is the will.

And don’t give me any spiel about international law. It is a bogus argument.

Is it? Your government has signed a treaty which makes the relevant international law binding on it. The chief thing which distinguishes legitimate governments from rogue states is that they act within the law. Once you establish the principle that government may act arbitrarily, without regard to law, then you are legitimising tyranny.

Your post calls for governments to act illegally according to both international law and the laws of the USA. You are advocating what your own country classes as international terrorism. Careful - the Department of Homeland Security might start paying attention to you.
18 U.S.C. § 2331 : US Code - Section 2331: Definitions

I suggest you amend your post.

 

[swerve]

I'll buy the pirate ports atack and punish concept (and have done so in darned near every post I have put forrward on this subject) but I would like to persist in the concept of onshore interdiction of pirate-associated traffic. Couple this with stepped up intelligence campaigns where the money is managed and deals are made and we may get somewhere.

Oh, I agree! Slam all of the smartly-suited middlemen we can catch in jail along with rough common criminals, do whatever we can to interdict traffic on land (but the most efficient way to do that is to support local forces which see the future in eliminating piracy), & take more decisive action against pirates at sea - definitely!

What I'm not in favour of is making it impossible for Somalis to catch fish, destroying any town or village which comes under the sway of pirates, etc. Mix stick & carrot. All stick just makes everyone your enemy, & that is stupid: it makes them the friends of any other enemies you have. Make piracy more dangerous & less profitable AND support those who are trying to make the country more peaceful & orderly & a better place to make legitimate business safe & profitable. That way, the locals don't have a choice between starvation & piracy, but (e.g.) fishing & piracy.

Remember how this scourge began: with the collapse of government, foreign fishing fleets moved in en masse & started destroying the livelihoods of local fishermen. Some of them decided to do something about it, armed themselves, & started hijacking foreign fishing boats partly for ransom & partly to frighten them off. Local warlords saw the profits to be made, & started 'licencing' foreign fishing boats, enforced by armed men. And it grew . . . with more & more warlords & others seeing the scope for expanding the new business, far beyond what the fishermen would ever have dreamed of.

Target the big men. There are far fewer of them, & they're harder to replace. Take away their profits & personal safety, & the small blokes become a much smaller problem, because they no longer have the organisation to take & ransom big ships. The business shrinks, its value to warlords shrinks, & they can more easily be induced to clamp down on it on shore.

 

[My2Cents]

Oh, I agree! Slam all of the smartly-suited middlemen we can catch in jail along with rough common criminals, do whatever we can to interdict traffic on land (but the most efficient way to do that is to support local forces which see the future in eliminating piracy), & take more decisive action against pirates at sea - definitely!

What I'm not in favour of is making it impossible for Somalis to catch fish, destroying any town or village which comes under the sway of pirates, etc. Mix stick & carrot. All stick just makes everyone your enemy, & that is stupid: it makes them the friends of any other enemies you have. Make piracy more dangerous & less profitable AND support those who are trying to make the country more peaceful & orderly & a better place to make legitimate business safe & profitable. That way, the locals don't have a choice between starvation & piracy, but (e.g.) fishing & piracy.

Remember how this scourge began: with the collapse of government, foreign fishing fleets moved in en masse & started destroying the livelihoods of local fishermen. Some of them decided to do something about it, armed themselves, & started hijacking foreign fishing boats partly for ransom & partly to frighten them off. Local warlords saw the profits to be made, & started 'licencing' foreign fishing boats, enforced by armed men. And it grew . . . with more & more warlords & others seeing the scope for expanding the new business, far beyond what the fishermen would ever have dreamed of.

Target the big men. There are far fewer of them, & they're harder to replace. Take away their profits & personal safety, & the small blokes become a much smaller problem, because they no longer have the organisation to take & ransom big ships. The business shrinks, its value to warlords shrinks, & they can more easily be induced to clamp down on it on shore.

Use the Afghanistan invasion model, but don’t follow up with nation building using foreign troops.

Identify the clan leaders running the piracy operations, if we do not know who they are already. Identify and select a rival clan that is not involved in piracy (probably because the clan is located farther inland and cut off from ocean access). Send in Special Operations personnel to make contact and arrange temporary alliances with the non-pirate clan leaders.

Then move a carrier into the region to provide air support for a limited duration campaign. The allied clan attack, the pirate clan militia responds, and the Special Operations personnel call in air strikes to destroy the pirate clan militia. Then the allied clan members swoops in to perform their usual RLBK, and everyone moves on to the next target.

The pirate clans will be losing wealth faster than it is coming in and coastal portion of the clan is being overwhelm with their refuge kin. The smart clans will negotiate an end to the campaigns in return for any captives they hold or held (they can buy them back from whoever they sold them to). The dumb clans get ground into the muck. And any clan leaders dumb enough to kill hostages to try and stop it should suddenly find there is no one they can negotiate with. Tell them we will negotiate with the new clan leaders when they present us with the old clan leader heads in a sack, and no, we do not want the rest of their bodies.

This way the on the ground footprint is minimized, and probably the cost of the intervention. It is also likely to produce a permanent realignment of clan strengths in favor of the non-pirate clans.

 

[John Sansom]

Use the Afghanistan invasion model, but don’t follow up with nation building using foreign troops.

Identify the clan leaders running the piracy operations, if we do not know who they are already. Identify and select a rival clan that is not involved in piracy (probably because the clan is located farther inland and cut off from ocean access). Send in Special Operations personnel to make contact and arrange temporary alliances with the non-pirate clan leaders.

Then move a carrier into the region to provide air support for a limited duration campaign. The allied clan attack, the pirate clan militia responds, and the Special Operations personnel call in air strikes to destroy the pirate clan militia. Then the allied clan members swoops in to perform their usual RLBK, and everyone moves on to the next target.

The pirate clans will be losing wealth faster than it is coming in and coastal portion of the clan is being overwhelm with their refuge kin. The smart clans will negotiate an end to the campaigns in return for any captives they hold or held (they can buy them back from whoever they sold them to). The dumb clans get ground into the muck. And any clan leaders dumb enough to kill hostages to try and stop it should suddenly find there is no one they can negotiate with. Tell them we will negotiate with the new clan leaders when they present us with the old clan leader heads in a sack, and no, we do not want the rest of their bodies.

This way the on the ground footprint is minimized, and probably the cost of the intervention. It is also likely to produce a permanent realignment of clan strengths in favor of the non-pirate clans.

I pretty much covered the same ground in an earlier post, emphasizing the need to protect the Somali fisherman from intrusive trawlers, longliners, and the rest.

As for the piracy financiers, I rather suspect that "we" already know who most of them are and would hardl;y be surprised to have it confirmed that they are not all Somalis.

The real point is that, while we all chatter away here, somebody with electoral clout has to step up to the plate and start swinging a vey large bat. It doesn't look like that's happening, or is even about to happen. There are now--what?--some thirty vessels held in thrall by the pirates and certainly more than a thousand crew members. Weekly, and damn' near daily, there are more attacks. From the viewpoint of those of us who are denied information (and you know what I mean), it seems that all officialdom can do is to sit around chewing on its fingernails and whimpering.

Oh, yes. Before getting carried away much too far by my own depressing rhetoric, I'd like to say thank you to the USN for the part its members played in the most recent outrage.:daz

 

[rip]

Is it? Your government has signed a treaty which makes the relevant international law binding on it. The chief thing which distinguishes legitimate governments from rogue states is that they act within the law. Once you establish the principle that government may act arbitrarily, without regard to law, then you are legitimising tyranny.

Your post calls for governments to act illegally according to both international law and the laws of the USA. You are advocating what your own country classes as international terrorism. Careful - the Department of Homeland Security might start paying attention to you.
18 U.S.C. § 2331 : US Code - Section 2331: Definitions

I suggest you amend your post.

Thank you for bringing up this topic. But as usual there are disagreements. First, about the treaties that that the US has signed; they have a way of being interpreted in ways ,especially in foreign courts, (through the so called ever expanding, ever more humanitarian, ever more civilized lens of human rights!), rights that fall to only to the purveyors of crimes but never to their victims. They are interpreted in such a way that neither the meaning of the treaty we signed no longer means what it says on paper, nor does the law do what it was intended to do. But nevertheless when a law fails to serve the common interest but in fact endangers it (the case that you are making), change the law. They is never an excuse for that.

But there is a far greater over riding principal both for piracy and it does in fact includes terrorism and other such evils as well. And it is this: it is not our responsibility to control ether the criminals, crazy’s or extremists of other societies. It is those societies responsibility to do that and if they don’t then the entire society is responsible for the actions of a few. They become and are in fact responsible because the very same criminals, crazy’s and extremist are nurtured within and protected by those societies. And those societies ether profit from their malefactor’s actions or at least permit atrocities to be committed by them, as long as they are committed upon someone else’s society. They are nether helpless nor are they innocent by their failure to take action.

In a truly moral society, not only will it prevent its malcontents from committing atrocities against others in the same way that it prevent the same malcontents from doing harm to its own, it will take the lead in punishing them for their unacceptable actions even where the victims of those atrocities are powerless to find or secure justice on their own.

Do not use the excuse of a failed government, it is more basic than that. What I have just stated has been true since before there were governments to rule man’s actions and will continue to be true in the future even if governments someday cease to exist.

 

[Nikkolo]

A Spanish warship escorting a vessel chartered by African Union

A Spanish warship escorting a vessel chartered by African Union ...

For whatever reason none of the respectful and knowledgeable members described of what these cargo's transported?

And speaking of stratigury (G.W.Bush).
Do you all really think that those guys are pirates as criminals and organized gangs in Dark Times? Or maybe some concerned fellows, who have had lost their hope to "correctly address" their issue to ANYONE and decided to take judgment in their own hands?
Why all of you so "rightfully" predominant?
Do you have any facts about using Somalia's aquatorial properties for European chemical and bio-tech companies as a dumping waste spots?
Do you have any facts about oil cargo traffic through their territorial waters? Fishing?

 

[Kilo 2-3]

For whatever reason none of the respectful and knowledgeable members described of what these cargo's transported?

And speaking of stratigury (G.W.Bush).
Do you all really think that those guys are pirates as criminals and organized gangs in Dark Times? Or maybe some concerned fellows, who have had lost their hope to "correctly address" their issue to ANYONE and decided to take judgment in their own hands?
Why all of you so "rightfully" predominant?
Do you have any facts about using Somalia's aquatorial properties for European chemical and bio-tech companies as a dumping waste spots?
Do you have any facts about oil cargo traffic through their territorial waters? Fishing?

Nikkolo, the vast majority of the shipping going past Somalia is well outside what is recognized as "territorial waters." And even now, we're hearing about ships being boarded hundreds of miles offshore. this is no longer about Somalis protecting their sovereign territory (if that was even the primary motivation in the first place)

Yes, things are bad in Somalia, but that doesn't excuse murdering and robbing from people who had nothing to do with the conditions in the first place. Shooting vacationing seniors in cold blood isn't exactly legitimate civil protest, is it?

 

[My2Cents]

For whatever reason none of the respectful and knowledgeable members described of what these cargo's transported?

Anything, literally anything. The Gulf of Aden off the north coast of Somalia is the entrance to the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, making it one of the busiest waterway in the world for general cargo. The Suezmax size limit is about 240,000 tons laden.

Why all of you so "rightfully" predominant?

Could you please explain your meaning here?

Do you all really think that those guys are pirates as criminals and organized gangs in Dark Times? Or maybe some concerned fellows, who have had lost their hope to "correctly address" their issue to ANYONE and decided to take judgment in their own hands?

Do you have any facts about using Somalia's aquatorial properties for European chemical and bio-tech companies as a dumping waste spots?
Do you have any facts about oil cargo traffic through their territorial waters? Fishing?

There was some justification early on when foreign trawlers took advantage of the lack of a Somali government to enforce the fishing laws, and some Somali fishermen began seizing fishing trawlers and holding them until ‘fines’ had been paid. But the behavior back then was nothing like what they are doing or demanding now.

Illegal dumping almost certainly occurred, again because there was no Somali government to enforce the laws. This is the international equivalent of dumping the waste at the side of the road in an unincorporated area at night.

The shipping route around the Cape of Good Hope passes Somalia. Any ships heading to the Atlantic from the Indian Ocean, or too large to fit through the Suez Canal, use this route. So long as they stay more than 12nm off shore (i.e. outside Somalia’s territorial waters) Somalia has no right to interfere with these vessels.

Absolutely none of this justifies the current piracy and ransom of vessels and private yachts.

 

[Ananda]

Target the big men. There are far fewer of them, & they're harder to replace. Take away their profits & personal safety, & the small blokes become a much smaller problem, because they no longer have the organisation to take & ransom big ships. The business shrinks, its value to warlords shrinks, & they can more easily be induced to clamp down on it on shore.

Yes I agree with that. Follow the 'money' and disrupt the 'money' circulation. It's the best way to take the operational capabilities of the backers in order to reduce the capabilities of the 'pirates' fleet to go to the sea.

Like the pirates in the Malaca's straits and south china sea, it's not secret that their bases were in the Indonesian Riau Islands and they are backed by 'chain' of Triads money that used local Chinese Businessman in Riau islands, some in Malaysia and using Local Indonesian ex-fisherman as 'sea soldiers' and got support from Local Police and Navy commanders in Riau and Sumatra areas.

Now the incidents is much reduces whille 'officially' due to more effective 'naval patraol' by Singaporean, Indonesian, and Malaysian navies, but also more importantly the present Indonesian administrations (something that Oppositions in here won't recognise it) more willing to clean up Naval, Army and Police commanders in the Sumatra and Riau areas, thus make the capabilities for the pirates 'enterprises' to operated and move the money more difficult.

In short, with less 'pirated goods' transactions can be conducted safely, the less money flow can be made, and it significantly reduce the 'profitability'. What about the 'sea soldiers'..?? Well they still around now being 'nice fisherman' conducting 'legal' fishing activities.

Will they take the chances as 'pirates' again...well you 'bet' they will...But with less money that can be made as the result of the more difficult transactions can be conducted...then less 'bosses' willing to 'bankrolled them' to conduct 'pirates enterprises' activities.

For centuries many society in the sourounding area of Malaca's straits were conducting 'pirates' business. Pirating is in their blood. However with disrupting the money flow of their bosses..then it's much easier to disrupt the 'pirates' enterprises than 'chassing' after them in the sea.

Now the International Navy chassing the pirates in the sea...guarding the convoys...but is there any significant effort to disrupt the money flow..?? That I still do not see. As long as the money flow still circulated more or less uninterupted, then the 'Pirates Enterprises' in Somalia with their Neighbouring supprt chain will not ceased to be reduced significantly and effectively.

 

[Blas de Lezo]

For whatever reason none of the respectful and knowledgeable members described of what these cargo's transported?

And speaking of stratigury (G.W.Bush).
Do you all really think that those guys are pirates as criminals and organized gangs in Dark Times? Or maybe some concerned fellows, who have had lost their hope to "correctly address" their issue to ANYONE and decided to take judgment in their own hands?
Why all of you so "rightfully" predominant?
Do you have any facts about using Somalia's aquatorial properties for European chemical and bio-tech companies as a dumping waste spots?
Do you have any facts about oil cargo traffic through their territorial waters? Fishing?

My god you have a some imagination!!!, a simple search would have told you that it was an AID ship destined to Mogadishu!!!!!

I could post a few links for you to read about it but......It does not seem by your post that you would be interested. If you are.... then google is my suggestion.

 

[swerve]

Yes I agree with that. Follow the 'money' and disrupt the 'money' circulation. It's the best way to take the operational capabilities of the backers in order to reduce the capabilities of the 'pirates' fleet to go to the sea.

Like the pirates in the Malaca's straits and south china sea, it's not secret that their bases were in the Indonesian Riau Islands and they are backed by 'chain' of Triads money that used local Chinese Businessman in Riau islands, some in Malaysia and using Local Indonesian ex-fisherman as 'sea soldiers' and got support from Local Police and Navy commanders in Riau and Sumatra areas.

IIRC it grew to include connections in China: cargoes & at least one hijacked ship were sold there. The Chinese government clamped down on that very effectively after a while, which cut off a source of money.