Somali Pirates
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: ENGLAND
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Thread Starter
Tonka, an interesting website little reported in the news and contradictory to that short report in the ST.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by hval; 14th Feb 2011 at 07:05.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@Cazatou,
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:-
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.
We could always bring back "Q" Ships.
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
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
Edited to add a further treaty
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Small victories though...
Raid on ship off Africa's east coast frees hostages held for three months | The Australian
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
Raid on ship off Africa's east coast frees hostages held for three months | The Australian
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
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
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
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
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!
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!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Age: 61
Posts: 909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ SASless,
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
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.
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
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: US Virgin & British Virgin,Islands
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Somali Pirates
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...
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...
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.