Korea Sanctions Blockade

[ORAC]

Torygraph articles. The subject seems strangely absent from the Times and grauniad....

Britain's obligation to blockade North Korea (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/10/16/dl1601.xml)

I forecast a certain individual will jump in here to comment pretty sharpish....

"....Since Labour came to power in 1997, the Navy has lost a third of its ships. We should be able to rustle up a couple of frigates or destroyers, a submarine, even an aircraft carrier. But as the Sea Harrier was withdrawn from service earlier this year, and its replacement does not arrive until 2013, those ships will be defenceless against missile fire. Unless our fleet shelters under the protection of the French or the Americans, its air defences are pitiful; were the Falklands crisis to recur today, our task force would be sunk before ever sighting Port Stanley.......

Crisis heightens as China attacks use of warships to intercept cargo vessels (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/16/wnkorea216.xml)

Navy taskforce will be forced to rely on France and America (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/16/wnkorea116.xml)

The Age: Australian Govt mulls N Korea blockade involvement (http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Govt-mulls-N-Korea-blockade-involvement/2006/10/16/1160850853353.html)

So, any one reckon Tony will be sending the fleet to join the US, Australians, Japanese etc in the blockade?

[dakkg651]

He will if Bush tells him to.

As it says in the article - for Gunboat Diplomacy to work it would be handy to have a gunboat. That rules out the RN then!

[robin]

I've got a Mirror dinghy if that's any help.....:ok:

[BEagle]

No doubt there's a team investigating the seaworthiness of HMS Victory?

Surely even that turd Bliar wouldn't commit forces which lacked any credible air defence?












Yes he would....:(

[teeteringhead]

C'mon WEBF, it's over an hour since BEags mentioned Air Defence of the Fleet......;)

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Over recent months, I've read Mb upon Mb of Ppruner text decrying the money "wasted" on Cold War inspired weapons and platforms. Some well timed Oriental sabre rattling suddenly concentrates our minds on how big and scary the World is. Immediately, AA and ASW capability emerges as a required asset.

If we are serious about containing N Korea's offensive nuclear capability to within her own national boundaries, it will require a credible Naval presence and airborne maritime reconnaissance. Needless to say the Americans and the Japanese are virtually on station and equipped for the task. The French aren't on station but could, if so inclined, make a contribution. The RN, on the other hand, has been starved of resources to sustain the Army in its various current roles. Similar is probably true of the Nimrod force. We would be hard pressed to field a credible DD/FF contribution, with or without SSN support. Theoretically, the CVSs and OCEAN could make a useful contribution, so long as they stay outside a hostile air environment. They would tie up ASW assets that could be used for dedicated patrol and contraband guard, though. Similarly, the T42 have a capability that may be absorbed in providing a precautionary AA screen. Even though the N Korean Navy is principally a coastal defence force, they have sufficient SSKs to make their presence felt. At this stage, of course, we don't know what indirect threat there will be from China. How apt to say that we live in interesting times.

Let's hope that the 1st Sea Lord is as frank and honest as the CGS has proved to be.

[Not_a_boffin]

"Theoretically, the CVSs and OCEAN could make a useful contribution, so long as they stay outside a hostile air environment. They would tie up ASW assets that could be used for dedicated patrol and contraband guard, though."

Or we could use the CVS as they were originally deisgned - to provide ASW screening for US CVBG. They might be particularly interested in this given that they've just about got shot of the S3 Viking and would struggle to put an ASW screen up currently. A ship capable of operating up to 12 dippers might be quite useful, particularly in shallow waters......P3 / Merlin hunter-killer combo anyone?

Shame it'll quash the fondly held notions of some in town that there are no nasty people out there who operate submarines. Might even remind folk of the original justification for MRA4.....shame we haven't got any yet...

[ORAC]

Canada seems in the same boat, so to speak.... MacKay: Canada will help halt Kim (http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/534729.html) But ability to enforce sanctions against North Korea questioned.

[Data-Lynx]

Come on Beags, they wouldn't send VICTORY because shipwrights now-a-days don't work on wood and the torado worm is rife in those waters. However, the RN does need heavy metal so there is always HMS Warrior, especially as she is 'sort of' afloat in Pompey.

Anyway, only history gets to re-define 'credible'.

[Navaleye]

The first international crisis since we got shot of the Sea Harrier and guess what? We need it. :ugh:

[Lazer-Hound]

Has it occurred to anyone that all this is happening really a very, very long way away from the UK and that the US 7th Fleet, Japan and South Korea all dispose considerable naval and air assets in the region? Consequently any contribution the RN could make would be negligible at best. Is it really in the UK's best interests to get involved in this?

[Wipeout]

Given the current overstretch of UK forces, would it really be wise for the UK to get involved just to look like we're a 'world player'. Let those in the vicinity assist any naval blockade. The US can spare a naval fleet - the UK can't. (Again, thanks Tony :ok: ....)

[Lazer-Hound]

Given the current overstretch of UK forces, would it really be wise for the UK to get involved just to look like we're a 'world player'. Let those in the vicinity assist any naval blockade. The US can spare a naval fleet - the UK can't. (Again, thanks Tony :ok: ....)

Indeed. Not sure what extra capability the RN could provide to this little lot:

http://www.c7f.navy.mil/Pages/shippage.htm

And that's not even counting the JMSDF or the RoK Navy.

[Mad_Mark]

This is so much like the state the UK Military was in at the start of WWII! Continual running down of equipment, manpower, ability, etc, until suddenly - guess what - you need what you no longer have. Don't those with the power read history books?

I am so glad that my particular fleet is down to less than 20 aircraft and we don't have a spares or manpower problem :E I mean, it's not as if we are needed do do all those different tasks at home, in Iraq, in Afghanistan, the waters of the Middle east, etc. God forbid if the N Koreans had submarines, we might be needed there too! What - they have :confused: Oh dear - best we order some more aircraft and cancel that day off I had booked for next June :sad:

MadMark!!! :mad:

[BluntedAtBirth]

This is so much like the state the UK Military was in at the start of WWII! Continual running down of equipment, manpower, ability, etc, until suddenly - guess what - you need what you no longer have. Don't those with the power read history books?


Well the 10-year Rule was in place from Aug 1919 to Mar 1932. If it had been revised in Sep 1929 it would have been 100% effective; being only 27 months late in being abandoned means it was still right for 80% of the time. Can't you understand simple Treasury mathematics....

[Not_a_boffin]

Indeed. Not sure what extra capability the RN could provide to this little lot:

http://www.c7f.navy.mil/Pages/shippage.htm

And that's not even counting the JMSDF or the RoK Navy.

Fair point, although all those USN vessels are short of ASW. However, you wouldn't want to bet against the JMSDF ASW capability.

[Pontius Navigator]

[SIZE=2]Or we could use the CVS as they were originally deisgned - to provide ASW screening for US CVBG. They might be particularly interested in this given that they've just about got shot of the S3 Viking and would struggle to put an ASW screen up currently. A ship capable of operating up to 12 dippers might be quite useful, particularly in shallow waters......P3 / Merlin hunter-killer combo anyone?

Er do we have any embarked ASW assets? Thought we were diverting the cabs to AFG? :sad:

[Lazer-Hound]

Fair point, although all those USN vessels are short of ASW. However, you wouldn't want to bet against the JMSDF ASW capability.

How do you work that out? Both the Ticos and the Burkes have extensive and highly modern ASW suites and are armed with SH60s and/or VL ASROC. Not to mention the SSN's. As you correctly mention, JMSDF is no slouch at ASW either. Plus there's 100+ P3's in theatre even in peacetime.

[dakkg651]

[QUOTE=Mad_Mark;2911578]This is so much like the state the UK Military was in at the start of WWII! Continual running down of equipment, manpower, ability, etc, until suddenly - guess what - you need what you no longer have. QUOTE]

Wrong MM.

We are in a much, much worse state than at the end of the thirties. At least then we still had a navy. And we had a state of the art fighter just about in service. Unlike Eurofighter now, the Spitfire was just what the RAF needed.

[grumpyoldb]

We do have more airworthy Spitfires than Typhoons these day's though!:)

[Navaleye]

Not sure we could rustle up an airgroup for a CVS even if we wanted. We have one NAS now committed to Afg, any thing with a rotor is also there, availability on the other Harriers appears poor.

[day1-week1]

The kipper fleet is without doubt stretched to the limit at the moment and probably couldn't support another Op. However it would begger believe if a maritime a/c couldn't support a maritime Op because it has effectively been side-lined into a 'overland' role. If the nimrod is required for what actually is its primary role, then I think its time to tell Comd ISTAR to get his sh*t in one sock, stop racking up the hours on a valuable asset doing a job that doesn't utilise two thirds of the crew, and let the kipper fleet get back to the job for which it is without any doubt the best in the world at.

[pr00ne]

Oh dear!

The RN has 25 escorts, of this fleet 1, yes one, is currently committed to operations in support of Iraq. Another is committed to Atlantic Patrol Task (North) and another is committed to Standing NATO Maritime Group2 in the Med. On top of this they have a couple of RFA’s and a MCMV deployed.
Can’t really see that there is massive overstretch there!

Afraid I disagree 100% with the article in the Torygraph, the UK has NO obligation to do a damm thing in support of a so far non existent blockade of North Korea.
If such a blockade is mounted then the US 7 th fleet and the South Korean navy should be more than capable of mounting it. If additional support is required then the Japanese have a large fleet and a huge Orion fleet they can utilise. Why should the RN get involved?

Navaleye,

Who needs the SHAR? To do what?

Mad Mark,

Afraid I cannot find a single parallel with the state of the UK military at the start of WW2. Nor is the political, international, military, economic or social situation in any way redolent of 1939.

[Gainesy]

Anyone have any inkling of the state of the Russian Far East Fleet? Viable or rusting?

[Navaleye]

Why should the RN get involved?

Pr00ne, In my view it shouldn't this is nothing to do with us. However when Bush picks up the phone and says "Yo Blair!" you can guess Operation XYZ will be announced.

Who needs the SHAR? To do what?

The sailors or may well get killed without it if the sh*t hits the fan. Even the Americans are overstretched.

North Korean Airforce (http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/agency/af.htm)

[GPMG]

Seeing as were so bloody busy that we couldn't spare a pot to widdle in if the FI were attacked again, I take that Bush would do the right thing and send a carrier force down south to scare the crap out of any Junta if needs be?

Or will we be like the little Danish kid plugging holes?

[Wyler]

We use the Polish to pick our fruit, serve us beer and bake our bread and god knows what else, why not man our Blockades. Plenty of them and they are cheap.

[Not_a_boffin]

How do you work that out? Both the Ticos and the Burkes have extensive and highly modern ASW suites and are armed with SH60s and/or VL ASROC. Not to mention the SSN's. As you correctly mention, JMSDF is no slouch at ASW either. Plus there's 100+ P3's in theatre even in peacetime.

Hmmmmm. Wouldn't like to rely on VLASROC in the shallow waters of the yellow sea. SH60 ain't all it's cracked up to be either.

NavalEye

As you rightly point out, no f/w available. Back to sheltering under CVBG CAP and filling the decks with Merlin. Should be able to get 12 a/c to sea from 814/820 & 824 even if 700M have to help out and even if some aircrew go jungly on foreign airframes.....Mind you, every other task would be binned including the training function.

Pr00ne

The only reason for the UK or RN to get involved is to demonstrate commitment to the UNSC resolution iaw our responsibilities as a permanent member. Don't go counting numbers - today there are only 6 DD/FF alongside Pompey & Guzz, including those in refit. The rest are either on their way east, invading Sierra Leone or at sea training.....

[Navaleye]

Boff,

Quote from JFH CO


Commander Bill Dean, Acting Force Commander JFH, said:

"A third of our front line force are currently in Afghanistan and if deployed the GR9 will represent a huge increase in safety to crews, support to ground forces and has been welcomed by my crews in theatre. It is the aircraft of choice for JFH.

"The GR9 represents the way ahead in terms of weapons needs as well as embarked and high intensity war operations. It has greater range, payload standoff survivability and communications and will be able to deliver offensive support with precision guided weapons prior to the introduction of the Joint Combat Aircraft."


http://www.modoracle.com/?page=http://www.modoracle.com/news/detail.h2f?id=11782

As far as I know we have a total of 7 aircraft in Afg. That makes an operational total of 21 for the entire force. Its hardly worth the effort.

[Out Of Trim]

Navaleye

If you read further down the MODORACLE link you posted; you'll see this:-


All 69 of the RAF's existing GR7 aircraft are being converted at RAF Cottesmore to high tech Joint Force GR9s by BAe Systems, which has converted the first batch on time and on budget. 24 of the 69 are now in service with 20 (Reserve) Sqn, which is the Operational Evaluation Unit, and 1 (Fighter) Sqn

:ugh:

- Still think we should have kept the Sea Harrier though!

[Navaleye]

I did see that. JFH is supposed to have an established strength of 36 a/c (4 operational sqns of nine a/c) It sounds to me like they are a long way off from achieving that number.

[Beermonkey]

Not in the dark blue myself so not biased, but anyone that questions the need for an organic maritime AD asset is short-sighted. The ability to project power from a naval platform is useless without the means to dominate the airspace, something we now cannot do. The RN is now a subserviant partner to any maritime Op as it cannot protect its own ships without DCA from a foreign power. The GR9, whilst a great CAS/IDS platform doesn't cut the mustard, even if they strapped 2 ASRAAMs onto it.

It's about time the government either stumped up the money to back-up the international profile it craves from the use of it's military, or accepts the fact we are no longer capable of doing everything that is asked of us and commit accordingly.

Naval Typhoon sounds great though.....

[FFP]

Not in the dark blue myself so not biased, but anyone that questions the need for an organic maritime AD asset is short-sighted. The ability to project power from a naval platform is useless without the means to dominate the airspace, something we now cannot do. The RN is now a subserviant partner to any maritime Op as it cannot protect its own ships without DCA from a foreign power. The GR9, whilst a great CAS/IDS platform doesn't cut the mustard, even if they strapped 2 ASRAAMs onto it.
It's about time the government either stumped up the money to back-up the international profile it craves from the use of it's military, or accepts the fact we are no longer capable of doing everything that is asked of us and commit accordingly.
Naval Typhoon sounds great though.....

Jeez Beermonkey !! You just swallow some Defence Doctrine book ?

Not the Beermonkey I know. You've changed . . . .;)

[Beermonkey]

I don't swallow. I don't even spit.

[The Helpful Stacker]

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40809000/jpg/_40809966_simoneverest.jpg
'The Royal Navy throw their full force into the North Korean blockade.'
;)

[Navaleye]

AW&ST is reported as saying that the MoD is looking at equipping six (!) sqns with F-35s.

[West Coast]

Stacker

Could ask the Iranians for the the rigid boats they borrowed back to add a little more fire power in addition to that little blue demon.

[WPH]

Commander Bill Dean, Acting Force Commander JFH, said:

"A third of our front line force are currently in Afghanistan and if deployed the GR9 will represent a huge increase in safety to crews, support to ground forces and has been welcomed by my crews in theatre. It is the aircraft of choice for JFH.

"The GR9 represents the way ahead in terms of weapons needs as well as embarked and high intensity war operations. It has greater range, payload standoff survivability and communications and will be able to deliver offensive support with precision guided weapons prior to the introduction of the Joint Combat Aircraft."

I take it he means a third of our front line Sqns (only 7 ac), not a third of our force. Can anyone explain why the Cdr thinks that the GR9 will be the aircraft of choice over the 7A - I take it he means GR9A? Also, why has the GR9 got a greater range?:confused:

[blodwyn]

Rumour has it that the Vulcan Restoration group have just recieved a large donation from the MoD as Tony thinks the Vulcan may reach the parts most politicians can not reach !

HMS Victory with a steam cat or a ski ramp....desarate times, desparate measures !

:ok:

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

If the CVSs go East, they will need credible interceptor fighters to cover them. As Beermonkey said, though, MKs7 and 9 are not up to that. A mud mover is not what we need in that role, unless we don't mind taking hits.

It's been commented on earlier that this bit of bother isn't in our corner of the room. One of the problems of having a permanent seat on the UN Security Council is that it carries certain expectations, so, perhaps we can't just stay in our corner. I think the French may have the same considerations. Maybe they would provide our top cover?

[soddim]

Seems like it's time to refurbish the gate guards - at least they worked in their day!

[Data-Lynx]

Lazer-Hound has a point about distance. UK plc closed the nearest base it had to the Pacific - HMS Tamar in Victoria Harbour - in Apr 97 and it was paved over for parking. With it went the last tangible permanent British military interest east of the Gulf. Furthermore, a painful history lesson suggests that any nation attempting an effective naval blockade is wasting its time and effort if control of the land borders or border nation coastal waters lacks similar discipline: Beira and oil, Hong Kong and illegal immigrants and, more recently, the Gulf and oil smuggling or work off Socotra.

Perhaps instead of kit, the UK could support a different military expedition? The six-nation talks from 2003 linked South Korea, Russia, Japan, China and the United States with North Korea. Why not forget the Cold War and answer Gainesy's question about Russia's Pacific Fleet. Open sources note some consolidation (reduction) of Russian strategic SSN interests in Krasheninnikov Bay, Kamchatka, while the Far East Military District Command shifted into Primorsk from Vladivostok. While Russia may have different political leadership challenges, it still has a lot of kit and it has even experimented with Sino-Russian exercises. The first was in Aug last year called Peace Mission 2005. Nationally, it managed 30 surface ships and submarines in an interoperability exercise this spring with aircraft and coastal defenses. It might match the Koreans for rust and some levels of serviceability but a Russian military presence could ginger the Chinese resolve and really confuse the Korean threat appreciation.

[Navaleye]

Going back a few years the RN had two berths at Singapore on long term lease. Invincible went their fater her far east tour when the Ozzies would not let her dock at Sydney in case she was carrying anything hot. Not a naval base I grant you but a facility that has value. As far as I know the arrangement still exists. More likely though is that the Japanese would provide support.

[Almost_done]

Dare I say more sabre rattling going on from the 'Dear Leader' no not BLiar but Little Kim (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6057718.stm).

[MarkD]

Unless the RN can blockage the Chinese border then naval sanctions against NK aren't worth a damn.

[Cumbrian Fell]

At the Singapore Naval Base at Sembawang, DLO own and the RN run, a fuels depots with several berths. Mainly used by 7th Fleet, but the Singaporeans are happy we are running it and not our cousins. Still functioning last year, with a 3-ringer in charge. Still some MQs up on King's Parade, if my memory serves me right.

Oh, and we should all be focusing on the Shanghai Cooperation process...go on, google it. Too difficult for me to post a link!

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Not wishing to re-light the: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=246637
Thread; you may be interested to know that RNSTO Singapore, to give him his true identity, is a Cdr DLO who is a uniformed CS Gd C1. Very good value for money he is too.

[ORAC]

BBC: France searches N Korean vessel

French officials in the Indian Ocean have inspected a North Korean ship under the terms of UN Security Council sanctions adopted against Pyongyang.

The ship was examined on the island of Mayotte, but there were no reports it was carrying any illegal cargo. It is believed to be the first time a North Korean vessel has been inspected under Security Council Resolution 1718. The resolution imposed sanctions on North Korea after it carried out a nuclear test in October. The measures are aimed at preventing North Korea from acquiring or spreading nuclear technology.

Customs officials carried out a "thorough and complete inspection" of the ship, its crew and its contents, a spokesman for France's foreign ministry said. "We are exercising particular vigilance regarding cargo transported by North Korean ships, and all ships starting from or heading to North Korea," he said.

The Associated Press news agency quoted a customs official as saying that no weapons, drugs or other prohibited material had been found on the ship or the 45-strong crew after a search "from bow to stern and top to bottom".

The UN Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1718 on 14 October.....

UN SANCTIONS ON N KOREA
Bans sale to, or export from, N Korea of military hardware
Bans sale or export of nuclear and missile related items
Bans sale of luxury goods
Freezes finances and bans travel of anyone involved in nuclear, missile programmes
Allows inspection of cargo to and from N Korea

[steamchicken]

Vive la France...

BTW, I knew we had residual basing rights in Singapore and about the 5 Power agreement, but I wasn't aware we actually owned any facilities there, still less that actual bluejackets were there. Fascinating..

[GlosMikeP]

Has it occurred to anyone that all this is happening really a very, very long way away from the UK and that the US 7th Fleet, Japan and South Korea all dispose considerable naval and air assets in the region? Consequently any contribution the RN could make would be negligible at best. Is it really in the UK's best interests to get involved in this?
I'm not sure if we still do, but we used to have formal commitments to support ASEAN.

Although S Korea isn't a member there are 3 Commonwealth nations in it - Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei - so it's entirely possible we have Treaty commitments to those nations in some form or other.

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Time to revisit this thread?

Here's a link to the Sea Jet thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=98152) that was hinted at in my absence.

In the three and a half (approx) years since this thread was started, the number of RN (and USN) ships has gone down, ASW and AAW capabilities have declined, the Nimrod has been retired pending the arrival of the MRA4 in x years time, and North Korea has demonstrated the real potency of its submarines against surface targets. And the NK boats are nowhere to be seen (http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2010/05/26/0301000000AEN20100526001200315.HTML)....

I hope any replies won't be as hysterical as Spad's comments on his thread (http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/416176-korea-shaping-up-big-mess.html).

[Double Zero]

WEBF,

Some people have said " why should we need the Seajet anyway, even if we did take part "; well if you can use AMRAAMS combined with look down / shoot down radar to take out cruise / anti-ship missiles ( somebody will no doubt provide the answer to that ) then I'd say they would be jolly useful !

As far as a blockade goes, I like everyone here think the bastards can't go unpunished for what they've done, but as someone else mentioned the North is already near famine, and if we back them into a corner it's surely pretty dangerous, with certifiable nut's in charge ?!

The only answer I can think of - easy from my armchair - is for their submarine force ( or anything else ) to quietly fail to return if ever daft enough to come out again, I'm sure other 'accidents' could happen.

As for the alarm in some newspapers about 4 sub's disappearing, it seems they're 300 ton jobs; hardly ocean rangers...

[WE Branch Fanatic]

DZ

They have gone unpunished. In fact, they seem to have produced a poster (http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/07/15/2010071500427.html) featuring the Cheonan.

[Load Toad]

'They've' got a statue with a bloke with no arms chucking grenades at Yankee Imperialist Dogs (not sure how he is supposed to get the pins out n stuff) with his teeth so I wouldn't be too bothered about a propaganda poster.
The North & South are still technically at war - so what T.F. do you want to do to 'punish' them (which would be for your benefit and not for the innocent people in the South OR the North)?