Somali Pirates

[Pontius Navigator]

I see from today's Torygraph that Royal Dutch Shell want the Royal Navy to launch military action against new pirate motherships off Somalia. In the last few days a Greek supertanker carrying Kuwati oil to the USA was seized.

This was one day after an Italian tanker was taken.

Is there something missing here?

[Jayand]

A lot of oil?

[green granite]

Is there something missing here?

Yes the will by spineless governments to deal with the matter properly in case the huggy fluffs start screaming about human rights. Countries like Russia, who don't give a toss about world opinion and deal with the matter by blasting the pirates out of the water if they attack, don't have their ships molested any more.

[hval]

@ Pontious Navigator,

Is there something missing here?

The ships might be of foreign ownership, the crews another nationality and the cargo due for multiple destinations, and owned by a totally different organisation.

For instance Shell might charter a greek owned tanker, registered in Monrovia that is crewed by Norwegians, Brits and Filipinos. The oil Shell wants carried might be from a Saudi oilfield and hence will be 50/50 Saudi/ Shell owned. The oil may be destined for the UK and other destinations, particularly after having been refined at a single location. Shell also have different charter contracts that share risk in differing ways and amounts.

Therefore a request for UK force protection is not as daft as it might first appear.

Hval

[Avitor]

Since when have those sitting at desks had anything other than warm @rses and the colour of the office curtains and carpets as a priority.

[hval]

@ Avitor

Don't you like the floor length, velvet, Barbie pink curtains in my office?

Hval

[Mad_Mark]

What we need is an MPA so that a large area of ocean can be covered quickly to locate these to$$ers and then vector warships, helicopters and ribs in to 'deal' with them :ok:

Ahh, I see a problem there - well done Cameron :ugh:

MadMark!!! :mad:

[pma 32dd]

Well I wouldn't expect much as a kn0b of a Wg Cdr on the Today programme last week was talking about the Pirates 'business model' - wtf? Staff school bollox

[Avitor]

@ Avitor

Don't you like the floor length, velvet, Barbie pink curtains in my office?

Hval

I got only as far north as Newcastle and saw enough. I thought about foraging further north but I had a feeling that agoraphobia was about to strike - as well as fear - and thought better of it. Have fun.... :ok:

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

As RDS has its registered office on the banks of the Thames and is a large constituent of the London Stock Exchange then I don't think its unreasonable for them to ask the Royal Navy to assist in providing a bit of safety in the worlds shipping lanes.

[green granite]

I don't think its unreasonable for them to ask the Royal Navy to assist in providing a bit of safety in the worlds shipping lanes.

That of course was one of the original reasons for having a strong navy, to protect British shipping anywhere in the world as it sailed around the Empire.

[VinRouge]

Seeing as we do the whole net centric thing so well these days, witht he advent of killer UAVs etc, what would be wrong with those Gimpy/minigun/40mm auto grenade launchers aimed with CCTV and monitored via satlink? as soon as we are within ROE, the military could engage targets from the tanker. The tanker companies could cover the install and maintainance cost, governments the manning and ROE, the pirates get wasted.

I have seen CCTV aimed weapons all over MRAP, all it takes is the "next step", IE satlink to the CCTV and weapon aiming.

Would seem to solve a lot of problems and means you dont need the boots on the ground to drill 7.62mm holes in these F*ckers. Skipper could even have a panic alarm.

[A and C]

I can see the request from on high for some protection in this area that is troubled by pirates....................... "send a frigate or two & one of those long range jets as air support"

"Errrr minister we can only find a minesweeper with air support if we are very lucky from a C130 that we have diverted from another trouble spot".

"well why are there no long range jets avalable?"

"minister you orderd them to be chopped up last week!"

[hval]

@ pma 32dd,

talking about the Pirates 'business model' - wtf?

The Wg Cdr wasn't as off target as one might believe. A couple of links for you. Have pasted one article and put a link to the second one, from the Financial Times.

From Wired (http://www.wired.com/politics/security/magazine/17-07/ff_somali_pirates)

The rough fishermen of the so-called Somali coast guard are unrepentant criminals, yes, but they're more than that. They're innovators. Where earlier sea bandits were satisfied to make off with a dinghy full of booty, pirates who prowl northeast Africa's Gulf of Aden hold captured ships for ransom. This strategy has been fabulously successful: The typical payoff today is 100 times what it was in 2005, and the number of attacks has skyrocketed.
Like any business, Somali piracy can be explained in purely economic terms. It flourishes by exploiting the incentives that drive international maritime trade. The other parties involved — shippers, insurers, private security contractors, and numerous national navies — stand to gain more (or at least lose less) by tolerating it than by putting up a serious fight. As for the pirates, their escalating demands are a method of price discovery, a way of gauging how much the market will bear.
The risk-and-reward calculations for the various players arise at key points of tension: at the outset of a shipment, when a vessel comes under attack, during ransom negotiations, and when a deal is struck. As long as national navies don't roll in with guns blazing, the region's peculiar economics ensure that most everyone gets a cut.
All of which makes daring rescues, like the liberation in April of the Maersk Alabama's captain, the exception rather than the rule. Such derring-do may become more frequent as public pressure builds to deep-six the brigands. However, the story of the Stolt Valor, captured on September 15, 2008, is more typical. Here's how it played out, along with the cold, hard numbers that have put the Somali pirate business model at the center of a growth industry.

Second article from the Financial Times (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/90adcea2-3548-11e0-aa6c-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1Dqxsk48g)

This is a good article worth a read. Can't cut and paste due to copyright reasons.

Hval

[hval]

From the same paper.


British Aid Holds Terrorists & Pirates at Bay
(http://somalilandpress.com/somaliland-british-aid-holds-terrorists-pirates-at-bay-20049)

“This is not just aid from Britain; it is aid for Britain too. Our aid to Somalia [Somaliland] is helping to make Britain safer, because conflict doesn’t just claim innocent lives in Somalia [Somaliland]; it also leads to international problems like piracy, migration and terrorism. None of these will be solved without tackling their root causes: ongoing instability and extreme poverty.”— U.K.’s International Development Secretary, Andrew Mitchell.

[baffy boy]

I think what is missing is what he actually said!

'Speaking on behalf of BSC members, he said international naval forces, including the Royal Navy, need to attack the giant floating bases, which have recently enabled pirates to threaten an area of the sea the size of the United States'.

That's a bit different from how this thread was started isn't it? He was asking for action from international forces not just the Royal Navy. Fair enough idea I would have thought (not that it's a new idea of course, and neither are mother ships, but if anyone thinks an international task organisation is going to authorise the use of deadly force on mother ships they really have no idea about the way things are done and probably won't know what POLADs LEGADs or ROE really are either.

While I am here by the way, on one of the few occasions kinetic action was taken by a unit (outwith an international task force) a crew of 20 odd innocent Thai fishermen died.

Unfortunately charging around shooting people isn't the way to solve the problem. It, and the issues that gave rise to it, have to be tackled at source and the truth is that it's probably easier to allow companies to shell out a few million every now and then than to open what would be a huge can of worms by trying to sort Somalia out.

[Piltdown Man]

Pirates = Live targets

Collateral damage? Yes. So... I am not really bothered. No. Please now tell me that the Somalis will withdraw their diplomatic missions from the UK. Even better. To get more targets, make sure "Trackers" are fitted to all top end Mercedes and Toyotas sold in Africa.

Extreme? Very. Will the lesson be learnt? Yes, very quickly or Darwinism will take it's course. Oh, and while we are at it, the targeting of the pirates appears to be very specific. So why don't we get our gifted and clever MI5/6 to find the information source and arrange for it to be silenced? Maybe those providing the information might like to go fishing, say in the Indian Ocean?

PM

[Pontius Navigator]

My scepticism was obviously missed.

In the article quoted the only direct British mention was the Royal Navy. The only direct link was that Shell had an office on the Thames. The only indirect link mentioned is crewed by . . . Brits . . . .

There is a possibility that oil bought by a part British company that I part own in a ship that might have a British crew members might be hijacked.

There is an equal possibilty that a cruise ship manned by British officers, carrying British passengers also part owned by me might also be at risk.

Why was there no appeal by RDS to European States such as Italy and Greece or to the navies of Saudi Arabia, Yemen or Dubai? Or even to the owners of the oil - the USA?

Why us?

[hval]

@ Piltdown Man,

So why don't we get our gifted and clever MI5/6 to find the information source and arrange for it to be silenced?

This might be desirable, but the majority of Security Service, GCHQ and Secret Intelligence Service are otherwise engaged. I am not sure how good our Somali humint is either; I suspect that it is not good.

To increase humint and other intel data levels would require further budget increases, above and beyond what has already occurred. With current budgetary restrictions I believe (my own opinion) that this is unlikely to happen. Providing aid to Somali military and police is a cheaper option, with less direct hazards to UK security. Also the Somalis are not as restricted in how they gather "information". Human Rights don't apply.

I do not necessarily agree with this conclusion as I believe national security to be paramount. Unfortunately the Coalition Government would appear to disagree.

Hval

[Pontius Navigator]

I think what is missing is what he actually said!

'Speaking on behalf of BSC members, he said international naval forces, including the Royal Navy, need to attack the giant floating bases, which have recently enabled pirates to threaten an area of the sea the size of the United States'.

That's a bit different from how this thread was started isn't it? He was asking for action from international forces not just the Royal Navy.

baffy thank you for sourcing the original quote. As I said 'the Torygraph'. Obviously an editorial axe grinder was at work.

Concerted international action is certainly required. There is a solution that would avoid friendly fire deaths, although not reprisal killings by the pirate, and the film 'Sink the Bismark' brings it to mind. Shoot out the rudder and propellor then they aren't going anywhere.

[Tonka Toy]

Portugese, Sweedish and Spannish MPA's have been in theatre on and off in recent years. Luxembourg MPRA's have been in theatre since Sept 09 pretty much non stop and hitting hard. Read the EU NAVFOR Somalia website. And they do have a complimentary Brit on the det apparently. So don't feel too bad.

[Pontius Navigator]

and Saudi, UAE, Greek?

[Tonka Toy]

The list is long and distinguished!!!

[Pontius Navigator]

Tonka, an interesting website little reported in the news and contradictory to that short report in the ST.

[hval]

There are ships from many countries fighting Somali pirates. These nations include: -

USA
India
Russia
China
South Korea
France
Somalia
Spain
Germany
Greece
Sweden
Netherlands
Italy
Belgium
Malaysia
Pakistan
Singapore
Sweden
Thailand
Turkey
United Kingdom
Portugal
Luxembourg
Malta
Estonia
Norway
Croatia
Ukraine
Montenegro
Japan
Australia


The above list is not complete. The UK provides a HQ at Northwood for the Europeans. As might be seen, many nations are participating. Just not all the time and not with enough ships.

Hval

[Unixman]

This might sound extremely naive but why aren''t escorted convoys at least being considered?

[hval]

Convoys were tried in 2008, and are still used when the system would work. Reasons why convoys are not used as much as might be are:

a). Ships with perishable goods cant't wait around

b). The cost of running ships and the insurance cost for carried goods is extremely prohibitive and who would provide for a loss of income or for a price increase for goods in the Market place

c). Ships are coming from all over the place, where would they gather to form a convoy?

d). The area that the Somali pirates are operating is is so vast that some convoys would be starting in the piracy zone. Where would they gather? They would have to be individually escorted, taking vessels away from the mammoth task of hunting down pirate boats

e). There are not enough naval assets in position to implement a full convoy system

f). Remember that a convoy is only as good as the weakest link in the convoy. You all travel at one speed

g). How would a naval escort protect the convoy? ROE's are very prohibitive. If the convoy escorts are taken up searching potential pirate boats, other pirate boats could board the ships. I.E. Overwhelm the convoy protection with pirate boat numbers

h). If the convoy system works, Somali pirate attacks drop off. The navy protection system goes home, the Somali pirates start again.

i). Cost to the tax payer. Are you willing to subsidise others goods?

j). What about yachts?

k). Ships going to different destinations. In the large area the Somali pirates cover, the convoy routes would end up adding significant mileage and time to ships routes

l). Some destinations are within the Somali pirate zone. How do you manage this?

The above is a list that is incomplete, and may need further explanation, but hopefully suggests some of the issues.

Edited for typing errors and to add a further point.

[EGTE]

What did we do the last time that merchant shipping was vulnerable to attack on the high seas?
Convoys.
Why not now?

[Scuttled]

EGTE

Ummm. I think a pretty comprehensive, and very informative answer was given in the post before yours.

Did you read it......? :rolleyes:

[cazatou]

We could always bring back "Q" Ships.

[hval]

@Cazatou,

We could always bring back "Q" Ships.

There might be a number of legality issues with Q ships. Now don't quote me as I may be wrong; in fact I just looked up the relevant articles from here (http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part7.htm):-

Under the United Nations Convention on The Law of The Sea, all warships, when sailing in neutral or international waters must be identified as such.

Article 107 states that seizure on account of piracy may be carried out only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect.

Under Article 92 a ship may not change its flag during a voyage or while in a port of call, save in the case of a real transfer of ownership or change of registry.

Article 105 states that on the high seas, or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State, every State may seize a pirate ship or aircraft, or a ship or aircraft taken by piracy and under the control of pirates, and arrest the persons and seize the property on board. The courts of the State which carried out the seizure may decide upon the penalties to be imposed, and may also determine the action to be taken with regard to the ships, aircraft or property, subject to the rights of third parties acting in good faith.

The following also exists, but may not apply unless the Somali pirates have signed up to it - Conversion of Merchant Ships into War Ships (Hague VII); October 18, 1907

Unfortunately Q ships won't do.

Hval

Edited to add a further treaty

[On_Loan]

Small victories though...

Raid on ship off Africa's east coast frees hostages held for three months | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/raid-on-ship-off-africas-east-coast-frees-hostages-held-for-three-months/story-e6frg6so-1226006279367)

As regards convoys, with a ship costing $20-30000 a day to run, and with margins already wafer thin there is a significant reluctance amongst most ship operators (with the exception of the state run fleets of China for example) to wait around for the forming of a convoy

[merch]

National convoys are being regularly run through the Straits of Bab al Mandeb.

Merch

[On_Loan]

Yes, by Russia/ China etc.. who have a large State-run fleet and therefore less financial constraints; your average western charterer running a Liberian flagged bulker or tanker is operating on a margin that wont allow too much hanging around

[cazatou]

hval

Fair enough - now what about DEMS.

[hval]

Cazatou,

My apologies for not responding sooner.

Depends what you mean by Merchant ships. Now a days many merchant ships fly under foreign flags and have mixed nationality crews. Therefore laws apply.

Believe it or not the merchant ships may be armed, but most nations require export licences (for the weapons) for every country that the vessel might visit.

UNCLOS does state that every State may seize a pirate ship or aircraft, or a ship or aircraft taken by piracy and under the control of pirates, and arrest the persons and seize the property on board. I suppose a non military vessel might be issued with warrants that allow them to carry out anti piracy activities, but there might be some difficulties as a seizure on account of piracy may be carried out only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect.

One of the problems is do you mean small arms (shotguns, non automatic weapons and pistols) or something slightly more lethal? E.G. Bofors, missiles etc. A number of yachts (increasing in number as well) are carrying small arms to defend themselves.

There are some flags that prohibit the carriage of arms or the use of violence. There are also some insurers that will not accept it, and a ships insurance will be void if weapons are carried.

You will probably have read about Blackwater and their proposals.

Blackwaters' solution of vessels with armed persons on board is interesting. The Djibouti government have given Blackwater permission for the paramilitary operations to be based in the Port of Djibouti. Security of the ships weapons whilst in port are to be provided by Djibouti Navy. US Embassy officials have expressed concerns about the legality of the plan.

Mind you, would you wish to be protected by Blackwater? Their tendency to indiscriminate violence and the killing of civilians would, and does, scare me.

I also question the legality of Blackwaters solution.

For your interest read this (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/10/blackwater/)

Possibly the best solution would be for the UN to pass a resolution allowing for "active" defence of ships by use of weapons. Only problem is controlling this. I also do not believe that use of military might is the total solution.

Cazatou, hopefully I have answered your question sufficiently. If not let me know. I could waffle on a lot more.


Hval

[SASless]

As I see it....some sovereign nation issues a Letter of Marque to an NGO who then can legally conduct anti-piracy operations against designated targets described within the Letter, using defined limits, and all is above board.

Take a few Frigates out of Mothballs....Bail them to the Contractor...lease the services of some B-212's with FLIR, Radar, Dillon Mini-guns, some Ma Deuce .50 cal's....former SEAL/SBS folks with RIBS.....and Bob's yer Uncle.

Pull alongside a boat with guns, boarding ladders, and other Pirate kit....and conduct business.

Sign me up!

[hval]

@ SASless,

Some sovereign nation issues a Letter of Marque to an NGO who then can legally conduct anti-piracy operations against designated targets described within the Letter, using defined limits, and all is above board.

As long as the ship is clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service, you meet the necessary requirements; except for weapons licences etc. I am sure something could be worked out.

Only problem is that in the area that the pirates operate from, the number of countries, the length of coastline is absolutely vast. Also, recognising boats on piracy raids is not easy. You end up with a large percentage of false positives. Think of the number of ships required.

What is required is continuous MPA (not just one aircraft either), aircraft/ helicopter carriers which provide fast access to suspect vessels, fast patrol ships and RIBs that are able to access the suspect vessels, whilst they are still under surveillance, and extremely good, current HUMINT, including when mother ships and small boats exit and access ports.

Mind you the numbers of vessels and aircraft required would be prohibitively expensive.

Remember, blockading ports wont work. Practically any piece of coastline can be used as a port for small vessels.

Hval

[Loerie]

Agreed that Port blockades will not work,as the smaller boats can be launched through the surf and the "mother ships" thereby serviced.Ports?There are Ports with cranes and things there?Could have fooled me.
There was some waffle from somewhere about the only way to fix this is to fix it from shoreward,outward and not from the sea.But it is clear,as written in one post,that the Russians,Chinese and Koreans seem to have little trouble with Piracy at Sea,possibly because they take no prisoners?
Every one talks about Law this and Law that and not being able to use Q Ships because of this and that Regulation,but surely one should consider fighting fire with fire?The UN seem to be powerless for some reason or another,and it seems that Ship-Owners are scared of having Teams onboard to repel boarders?
So where onwards....?A small nasty dusty lawless country holding the World to financial Ransom ?
And what of the guys that own and run the Suez who make billions out of that operation?Would one not have thought that they may be interested in keeping their custom rather than sending all the sheep around the Cape of Good Hope?
C`mon fellas----its time to think about this very carefully;Lethargy seems to be keeping the Pirates in business and they will continue in business as they are no longer News on CNN and BBC.......we will just accept the increased cost of shipping and in lives and push the problem under the bed----how weak and pathetic we have become...

[cazatou]

How about a Geostationary Satellite monitoring the area in the vicinity of Somalia and a UN sponsored Multi National Anti - Piracy Task Force. This is not a UK problem - it is a UN problem.

[hval]

@ Loeri,

Ports?There are Ports with cranes and things there?Could have fooled me.

Hhmm. You have me scratching my head. What is your definition of a port? Does it have to have cranes? Quays made from concrete, driven sheet piles, a lighthouse and a lifeboat? The ancients had ports, they didn't necessarily have the above features.

My definition of a port is somewhere where vessels can call for supplies, POL, repairs, to load/ offload goods, troops etc - or any combination of the previous. Cranes are not necessary. I have been to many African and Asian ports that utilise mobile cranes if they require them.

As for ports, as you might think of them, there are huge numbers. The pirates are not limited to Somalia. You have Middle Eastern nations as well as Africans from all over Africa and access to ports in all those countries. Also, why not look across to Asia and the Indian Ocean for additional pirates.

As for lawlessness in Somalia, ask what has created the Somali pirates. Take a look at how we, the morally perfect West have totally depleted their fishing stocks for them, dumped huge amounts of toxic waste in their country, onshore and offshore, with no redress for them to prevent it from occurring. They also have no government and huge corruption and fighting, along with starvation, little education and medical facilities. I think I might be somewhat miffed and start thinking as they have; "If the West can steal from us, reduce our lifespan, and poison our food supplies, why do we not do the same".

I do not condone piracy, neither do I condone what we have done to them.

Hval

[Loerie]

There`s a good idea!
But how to get the UN up and running would be a task unto itself...
Yes,I would be sure that the Pirates would not appreciate an eyeball up there tracing every move-----but wait a minute----are there not already a few up there good enough to read newspapers?
Maybe the UN could wet-lease one......?

[hval]

@ Cazatou

How about a Geostationary Satellite monitoring the area in the vicinity of Somalia and a UN sponsored Multi National Anti - Piracy Task Force. This is not a UK problem - it is a UN problem.

There are already satellites monitoring the oceans. For example MARISS (Maritime Security Service) provides pre-operational satellite-based maritime surveillance services for European waters, East Africa, the Caribbean and the Atlantic to support maritime law enforcement, anti-trafficking interventions and to protect shipping lanes. (I copied the previous word for word). There are other satellites as well.

Satellites are an aid to the solution. A few questions. How do you recognise the "bad guys" from space? If you can tell a potential baddy, how do you get the "good guys" there in time to intercept, inspect, prevent piracy etc? You may be days away from the potential bad guys. A lot of harm could be done in that time.

As for the UN, the UN are made up of us, the nations of the world. How many are really going to provide the necessary materiel and personnel to carry out the necessary task. What countries can afford to?

Forgive me for appearing so negative, I am only trying to point out the realities. There is no simple solution. Use of brute force is only going to annoy a whole bunch more people than we already have (i.e. by supporting corrupt, nasty governments in the Middle East to guarantee our fuel supplies).

A question for you all: where does all the hostage/ hijacked ship money go? I mean, after salaries, fuel, loans, security, weapons, food etc.

[aviate1138]

The Russian way.....

YouTube - Russian Navy vs Somali Pirates (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTrkcQJ9i2I)

If in a hurry, go to 04:30

I guess the RN has to respect the Pirates Human Rights........ Here comes Cherie Blair over the horizon......

[Loerie]

Hit the nail on the head,you have!
Al those sparkling new cars,new outboards,new skiffs,new weapons,radars,radio`s----the list is endless.
The post regarding (ports) and the west being to blame for the mess the country is in......well,I take you point,up to a point.Go back in history----not too far----and see who raided the coffers and split the nation and disrupted government.You may be surprised....

[Loerie]

Extracted from The Triton,a magazine for Yachtsmen and Mariners,with thanks."
In the hours and days after Somali pirates hijacked a 58-foot yacht off the coast of Oman and subsequently killed the four Americans aboard on Feb. 22, the yachting community struggled to make sense of news reports, government statements and military action.
“I see no reason for pirates to kill four people with a warship staring down their necks,” said Capt. Mike Dailey, who has traversed the region three times in the past year. “It just makes no sense.”
Indeed, the immediately released details present an almost unbelievable situation.
Nineteen pirates were involved in the hijacking, most of who were on the yacht when the shooting began. Four U.S. Navy warships were involved in the response force – an aircraft carrier, a guided-missile cruiser and two guided-missile destroyers. Gunfire, believed to have been a rocket-propelled grenade fired from the yacht toward one of the Navy ships, began while officials from the FBI were in negotiations with two pirates aboard the Navy ship. The remains of two pirates were found on the yacht when Navy forces boarded, killing two others and detaining 13 others.
“What possible use was an aircraft carrier?” Dailey asked. “How do you get 19 pirates on board? With the four Americans, that’s 23 people on a 50-foot boat. Who decided to divert Navy assets in aid of a 50-foot sailboat and four people?”
Details so far
According to government statements, news reports, and involved parties, S/Y Quest had been in the Blue Water Round the World Cruising Rally from Phuket, Thailand, to Mumbai, India. After arriving in Mumbai, “The skipper then made a decision to leave the Rally in Mumbai on 15 February and sail a route independent of the Rally to Salalah, [Oman],” rally organizer Peter Seymour told Sail-World.com.
According to that Web site, the owners, Scott and Jean Adams, requested an escort by the Navies patrolling the area but were denied. The yacht was hijacked about 280nm off Oman and was being taken to the northern tip of Somalia when U.S. military forces responded.
Two pirates boarded the Navy ship Feb. 21 to negotiate the crew’s release with FBI officials, according to news reports and U.S. government statements. During these negotiations, at about 1 a.m., gunfire could be heard on board the Quest, U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Mark Fox told reporters.
U.S. forces then approached and boarded the Quest, getting into a skirmish with pirates aboard. All four of the crew – the Adamses of Marina del Rey, Calif., and Phyllis Mackay and Bob Riggle of Seattle – had been shot by their captors, according to a statement from U.S. Central Command. Efforts to revive them were unsuccessful.
Two pirates were killed in the skirmish and 13 were captured and detained, CNN reported.
“In total, it is believed 19 pirates were involved in the hijacking” of the vessel, Central Command said.
No details of the negotiations or whether a ransom had been offered were available.U.S. forces had been monitoring the Quest since it was hijacked Feb. 18. U.S. Central Command said four U.S. Navy warships were involved in the response force.
More yachts attacked
The attack on the S/Y Quest is the latest in a number of attacks on yachts. According to the BBC:
1. South African couple Bruno Pelizzari and Deborah Calitz are still being held in Somalia, four months after their vessel, the S/Y Choizil, was hijacked.
2. Paul and Rachel Chandler were held for nearly 400 days after their yacht was hijacked near the Seychelles in October 2009.
3. French yacht owner Florent Lemacon was killed in April 2009 when French commandos tried to liberate him and four other people from their hijacked yacht, the Tanit, off Somalia. Somalia has had no functioning central government since 1991, allowing piracy to flourish off its coast.
In addition, the German-owned transport ship Beluga Nomination was carrying eight yachts on deck when it was hijacked en route to the Seychelles on Jan. 22. A German newscast of the incident shows photos of the ship and its yacht cargo. At least one is a megayacht. The yachts have since been off-loaded and are believed to remain in the hands of pirates, who may use them for additional attacks.
The international security flotilla’s response to that incident is another cause for question. After reporting their mayday, the crew of 12 locked themselves in the citadel, the secure room onboard where they can be safe and disable the ship. After three days, pirates were able to enter the room and take control of the ship. It remains in pirate hands.
“And we divert four warships from their primary mission of protecting the world’s merchant fleet for a 50-foot sailboat and four Americans?” Dailey asked. “How arrogant can we be? Do you think the Germans got that kind of response? The Brits didn’t.”
The Chandlers, a British couple kidnapped last year from their yacht, the Lynn Rival, were taken ashore in Somalia. British authorities negotiated their release after more than a year for about $1 million, it was reported.
In April 2009, pirates seized the U.S.-flagged Maersk Alabama, leading to a standoff in the Indian Ocean. U.S. forces moved to rescue American Capt. Richard Phillips after seeing a pirate aiming a weapon at his back, officials said at the time. Navy sharpshooters killed three pirates; one was arrested. The Somali man arrested was convicted of acts related to high-seas piracy, and a federal court in New York sentenced him last week to more than 30 years in prison.
As of Feb. 15, pirates were holding 33 vessels and 712 hostages, according to the International Maritime Bureau (IMB).
Piracy hits record
Despite having been prevalent for centuries, piracy in the region reached record numbers in 2010, the fourth straight year of increases. According to the IMB, which tracks such attacks, pirates took a record number of hostages, 1,181, and killed eight mariners.
Somali pirates accounted for 49 of the 53 ships hijacked last year and 1,106 of the kidnappings. A total of 445 attacks on ships were logged by the IMB’s piracy reporting center in Kuala Lumpur, a 10 percent increase over 2009 and the highest figure since the previous peak in 2003.
“These figures for the number of hostages and vessels taken are the highest we have ever seen,” said Capt. Pottengal Mukundan, director of the Malaysia-based Piracy Reporting Centre, which has monitored piracy worldwide since 1991. “As a percentage of global incidents, piracy on the high seas has increased dramatically over armed robbery in territorial waters. On the high seas off Somalia, heavily armed pirates are overpowering ocean-going fishing or merchant vessels to use as a base for further attacks. They capture the crew and force them to sail to within attacking distance of other unsuspecting vessels.”
More than 90 percent of ship seizures occurred off the coast of Somalia. The number of attacks in the Gulf of Aden has dropped sharply due to an international naval presence there, the IMB reported.
“I’ve seen them [pirates] moving farther south, farther east all the way to the Maldives and the Mozambique Channel,” Dailey said.
The problem is area. The entire United States east of the Mississippi River could fit into the Somali basin, Vice Admiral Fox said. Thirty-four warships patrol the region under 15 flags and work well together, he said, but “there’s a lot of places where we are not.”
A few solutions
About 800 miles to the south and east of Somalia, travelers to the Seychelles often pass through the same areas as S/Y Quest. As a yacht management company supporting visiting megayachts to the region, Alastair Maiden of Seal Superyachts Seychelles monitors piracy news.
He recommends vessels take security companies with them when transiting the Indian Ocean, Gulf of Aden and Red Sea areas.
“There are options of armed escorts,” he said. “They have small patrol boats in the area. They have six crew on each vessel and stay with the traveling yacht. Sometimes if smaller or private vessels are cruising together, they can organize a convoy and possibly afford it together.”
Most often, however, boats will use onboard security, he said. As to why S/Y Quest didn’t have security onboard, Maiden thought it might be for financial reasons.
“We had a guy in the marina on a smaller yacht going to the Maldives and, basically on the advice of the port authorities, he had the boat wintered and cancelled the trip,” Maiden said. “That size and speed cannot be protected and typically they don’t have the funds to do so.
“Anything over, say, 50m, there is a risk [of piracy], but if they take precautions and have armed security, I would say it is OK,” Maiden said. “But they must take all precautions, the razor wire, trail lines, all of it.”
Not even that will prevent an attempted attack.
“How do you go in the middle of the ocean and find a 50-foot sailboat?” Dailey asked. “These attacks are well orchestrated and well organized. They knew where they were going, and they got that information from somebody. That’s why I run dark, no AIS. When the AIS is on, I run confusing information before I leave. And I don’t tell the agents in Egypt where I’m going.”
The Marshall Islands shipping registry issued an advisory soon after the killings to advise its yacht and commercial clients to cease transiting the area.
Jon and Sue Hacking, cruisers aboard the 45-foot catamaran Ocelot who have contributed stories about their travels to The Triton since 2004, have spent the past year cruising in the Indian Ocean.
“We have thought about the problem [of piracy] quite a bit, of course, being here in the Indian Ocean,” they wrote in an e-mail to friends the day the Adamses were reported killed. “As we see it, the long-term solution probably involves lots of aid to Somalia as well as helping them establish a working government. But the Somali warlords who currently hold the power are unlikely to relinquish it anytime soon, so we also need a shorter-term solution.
“Shipping companies have no option - they must pay the ransoms - so the solution has to be military,” they wrote. “We don’t like to complain without proposing solutions, so here are a couple of proposals we’ve come up with:
“1. Blockade Somalia. The coastline is 1,600nm if you include Puntland and Somaliland along the north coast. Station ships 50-100nm off the coast (so out of Somalia’s territorial waters), search all ships coming out of Somalia and take away any weapons. No weapons, no piracy.
“The Israel’s have been doing this for years on their own coast, and Australia patrols a much longer coastline. Given Somalia’s sad economic state, not many boats are going to or from Somalia so there shouldn’t be many boats to search.
“If necessary, designate entry and exit paths and let it be known that any boat using different lanes will be attacked. This solution also prevents others from fishing the Somali coast, which has been one of their complaints.
“2. Set up stations in the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea where ships could stop to take on about four Marines. The Marines would need to be allowed to fire on pirates, or at least to return fire. The Marines would ride on and protect the ship for 2-3 days as they transit the pirate areas and then get off to catch another ship going the other way.
“Both the ships and the Marines would love it. About 300 ships/day go through that area. Unfortunately, this wouldn’t help us (unless more stations were setup) and also wouldn’t stop the attempts at piracy (the ransoms are just too great)."
Like the Hackings, the Adamses were long-term cruisers who would rather be aboard their boat than just about anywhere else. Shipping their beloved Quest on a cargo ship to the Mediterranean was not an option for them. Christian missionaries seven years into a round-the-world cruise, they opted instead in favor of sailing a new passage, even without an escort.
“They know the risks,” said Nancy Birnbaum, a freelance journalist and former editor of the Seven Seas Cruising Association newsletter. “Certainly, there are other options,” she said. “Shipping your boat is obviously safer, and it gets your boat where you want it.
“As a cruiser, though, I know it’s just part of it,” she said. “This type of trip is typical of long-term cruisers; that’s just what they do.”

[Navaleye]

I have nothing but praise for the Russians in the way that they deal with these scum. This may be the mob that they left in a life raft who sadly didn't make it back to their dustbin of a country. If so, I hope the sharks found em tasty.

[Loerie]

Here is another that just came in........Dockwalk - The Essential Site For Captains And Crew - DockTalk (http://www.dockwalk.com/Essentials/DockTalk.aspx?g=posts&t=38544)

Something clearly needs to be done....

[hval]

@ Loerie,

Unfortunately I have not been able to respond to your postings, and I am in somewhat of a rush at the moment. I do apologise. I shall endeavour to respond to some of your comments. My apologies if I pick the easiest points.

1/ Blockade Somalia - not feasible. The number of vessels required would be large. Without enough vessels the blockader could be decoyed away and off the pirates sail. Also many of the boats might be difficult to pick up on radar. Next what about legal fishermen and supplies? National boundaries may also be a problem.

2/ Blockade Somalia - not all pirates come from Somalia

3/ Set up stations in the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea where ships could stop to take on about four Marines. - Nice idea, poorly thought through. I can see lots of issues. Ships sailing in pirate infested waters to get to said Marines. Ships would be coming from all directions. You would be better off boarding Marines at port of departure. Insurance may be void if you have weapons on board.

4/ “The Israel’s have been doing this for years on their own coast, and Australia patrols a much longer coastline. Given Somalia’s sad economic state, not many boats are going to or from Somalia so there shouldn’t be many boats to search." - The sentence "Their own coast" gives it away here. They have humint on shore; they can use their own coastal regions and hinterlands for resources, bases, airfields, ports etc. They can control access to their coastline from land, as well as from sea. Their aircraft have airfields reasonably near by. They are in control of the area. Finally there are more vessels than you might believe.

Finally, finally, I must state again that the area where pirates are operating is big; really big; really, really big. In fact vast. There are just not enough assets to resolve the issue how you might like. Also, travelling distances takes time. Ships are not fast. Ships on patrol that are able to go fast and do, do not stay on patrol as long as they might. Fuel is an issue, as is maintenance of items and hulls and all else that suffers at high speed.

Once again, my apologies for not spending more time on your points. I just do not have the time at the moment.

Hval

[TSR2Eagle]

Hval is correct; the area covered by the pirates is vast and growing almost daily - in that the pirates are prepared to travel further in search of 'targets'.

Whilst the Russians deal with pirates in what might be described as a 19th century approach - and very effectively too in terms of the fact that fewer Russian merchant ships seem to have been targetted in recent months - navies have no legal powers other than returning captured pirates back to their homes! A ludicrous situation even if the pirates kit is sent to the bottom. And I always thought/believed that piracy on the high seas was illegal under the terms of international maritime law...

NATO, et al, needs to consider the introduction of convoys. With the number of warships from different countries patrolling the area there should be sufficient warships. The problems, as in the early days of WWII convoy organisation, will be with the merchant navy captains and the ships owners.

[GreenKnight121]

NATO has been running convoys through the area for years... they haven't been getting a lot of press because they haven't been that effective... ships have been taken by pirates from convoys!

Additionally, the operations are far more sophisticated than just a bunch of fishermen taking along some guns.


Unfortunately, the link no longer works, but I'm sure some Googling will find something more:

On call Convoy requests on the rise
Justin Stares Brussels - Tuesday 4 November 2008

THE European Union anti-piracy cell is already receiving five requests a day from ships looking for protection from pirates in the Gulf of Aden, writes Justin Stares in Brussels.

Shipowners were initially reluctant to join the Brussels convoys but have since changed their mind, said piracy cell chief Andres Breijo.

The convoys, led by two French frigates and overseen by a Spanish reconnaissance aircraft, began offering transits to commercial shipping last month and have already been swamped by requests.

"Shipowners did not initially welcome the service because it meant adjusting their schedules and waiting for the warships to depart," said Cap Breijo, right. "This costs money. "But since then they have changed their minds and we are now receiving five protection requests a day."

The demand has created "asset problems" for the EU because the two frigates can only "fully" protect two ships each. Given the fortnightly sailings in each direction across the gulf, this is wholly inadequate for the 300 ships, which are in the gulf on any given day, Capt Breijo said.

But frequencies will be improved once the EU's first armada arrives in the region in December. Separate and complementary Nato forces are also expected to take part in the convoy operation and a Russian vessel is also co-ordinating with the EU operations, Capt Breijo said.

While a frigate can only fully protect two ships, other vessels are reported to have tagged along. The French frigates have already seen off several attacks, said the EU chief, without giving details. "Other ships can stay close," he said. "It can be a deterrent. It is better than being on the outside [of the convoy]."

Ten nations have pledged support for the EU's first joint naval operation, scheduled to last a year. EC Audiovisual Library

http://www.lloydslist.com...n-call-...d=1225729774221


This entry didn't have a link:
Fairplay 6 May 2009 Pirates seize escorted ship

A GERMAN-owned ship with 11 crew members has been seized by pirates from within a warship-escorted convoy in the Gulf of Aden transit corridor, EU naval forces reported today.

"The vessel ... was sailing within the transit corridor and was picked out of a group transit within only a few minutes," an official statement from EU NAVFOR said.

"A helicopter from the closest warship was too late to prevent the ship from being hijacked," the statement continued, adding that the crew was believed to be unhurt.

Victoria - a 10,500dwt general cargo vessel flagged in Antigua & Barbuda that is owned and managed by Haren of the German group Intersee - was taken yesterday afternoon about 120 n-miles north of the Somali port of Boosaaso, EU anti-piracy officials told Bloomberg.

Lieutenant Nate Christensen, spokesman for the Bahrain-based US Fifth Fleet, told the Associated Press that the entire crew is Romanian. An Intersee executive confirmed the attack today and told Bloomberg the vessel was carrying 10,000 tonnes of rice to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

These two were from two of the long-running discussion & news threads on Somali piracy on the Warships1 board:
EU/NATO antipirate fleet now fighting pirates (http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/7518)

Somalia pirates (http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/4553)

Checking locations of the incidents over time shows a steady movement of the incidents from the Gulf of Aden to the south and east, out into the larger ocean off the African coast.

This is after the ships separate onto many different courses, for many different destinations, making continues convoy operations very difficult to do.


Oh, as for the other... here is a May 2009 report on that:

Somali pirates guided by London intelligence team, report says | World news | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/11/somali-pirates-london-intelligence)

Somali pirates guided by London intelligence team, report says
Document obtained by Spanish radio station says 'well-placed informers' in constant contact by satellite telephone.

Giles Tremlett in Madrid
Monday 11 May 2009 12.59 BST
Quote

The Somali pirates attacking shipping in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean are directed to their targets by a "consultant" team in London, according to a European military intelligence document obtained by a Spanish radio station.

The document, obtained by Cadena SER radio, says the team and the pirates remain in contact by satellite telephone.

It says that pirate groups have "well-placed informers" in London who are in regular contact with control centres in Somalia where decisions on which vessels to attack are made. These London-based "consultants" help the pirates select targets, providing information on the ships' cargoes and courses.

In at least one case the pirates have remained in contact with their London informants from the hijacked ship, according to one targeted shipping company.

The pirates' information network extends to Yemen, Dubai and the Suez canal.

[TSR2Eagle]

GreenLight121 wrote;
NATO has been running convoys through the area for years... they haven't been getting a lot of press because they haven't been that effective... ships have been taken by pirates from convoys!

If this is the case then the RN aren't aware of it! According to Navy News the RN operate warships deployed to the region as singletons and not as part of a convoy protection system (see latest issue, March 2011).

Assuming you are correct, I very doubt they are on the same basis as convoys were organised during 1941/42. They certainly are not systematic.

As for the popular press, success stories have never been 'good' news! The more negative the story is, the greater the press appeal.

[TSR2Eagle]

I've had a look through the Warships1 board and from what I've read there's no comparison with what's being done to protect ships from Somali pirates, and others, with the very tight convoy system used during WWII. I note too that the French option is to offer what is referred to as Close Support Protection - having marines on board merchant ships. This suggests to me that the convoy system, such as it is, is not as tightly organised as I would expect. Probably the word 'convoy' is being used very loosely in the Gulf and Indian Ocean, etc.