Methods for combating modern piracy......

[={FH}=Paddy]

Well firstly, I’m glad to see that this article has gained an element of debate, both with serious and somewhat more humoristic approaches!!!

A couple of points that I was considering, after reading over your comments, please correct me if I am wrong but is it not an international maritime offence to carry weaponry through national shipping jurisdictions? I know that in Indonesia (and general Far East) this “piracy” issue has been greatly looked in to and debated over many years. Some suggestions have been both the use of armed escorts (navy ship in the form of convoy protection) and alternatively, specially assigned “on board task force” accompaniment through the Strait of Malacca but this did not completely hold maritime legislative water; excuse the pun! (It has also been claimed and reported that some of the Indonesian / Philippine “British trained” anti piracy special force groups have seen it fit and more lucrative to join the other side and exploit their gained training to great reward!!)

The comment about the use of “Blackwater” (or any such CPC for that matter) in such a scenario would worry me greatly. Their trademark of overwhelming, indiscriminate use of force has a tendency to escalate a situation unnecessarily and runs the risk of greater use of reciprocating force and avoidable reprisals; greatly in comparison to what we have seen in the Gulf of Eden and East Coast of Africa to date. (If we look at Iraq, Blackwater, being still a more or less unaccountable entity has achieved little more than to justify the moderate Iraqi to become the extremist on many occasions, through their heavy handed approach. While on the contrary but in the same line of work, the British CPC’s have gained both respect and credibility on the ground by blending in with the indigenous population, not creating a scene with their “potential” firepower and maintaining a effective and low presence and thus being more efficient and professional alike). Either way, CPC’s would worry me.

As jimbuna mentioned, I see the use of “ferryman convoys” being the most realistic for the time being, rally point and drop off, return journey reciprocated etc. As we speak we have a multinational maritime force insitu, British, American, Chinese, Dutch, and Australian, to mention but a few participating nations, yet still no eradication or even an element of prevention to date? Is the obvious being over looked?

The (token stand in government in Somalia, for what it is worth) has agreed for international forces to use force within their waters to prevent piracy, can anyone say if this has been afforded to land based operations? Maybe as the old man “Lord Palmerston” suggests, "Taking a wasps' nest... is more effective than catching the wasps one by one…….."? Should these forces start land based operations at the hub of the problem? Or is “The Mog” still to fresh a topic to consider this action?

I welcome both your interest and thoughts on this debate.

(Humorous ones too!)

[Letum]

Originally Posted by ={FH}=Paddy

please correct me if I am wrong but is it not an international maritime offence to carry weaponry through national shipping jurisdictions?

I could also be wrong, but I am under the impression that this only applies to
mounted guns, not small arms. Can anyone confirm this?

[August]

Inaccurate assessments on the capabilities and effectiveness of a particular private security company aside, I'd think it would likely be prohibitively expensive to put a security team that was big enough and well armed enough to do the job on each and every ship that travels through that area. After all only a tiny fraction of the huge number of ships that transit the area every day are attacked.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by August

I'd think it would likely be prohibitively expensive to put a security team that was big enough and well armed enough to do the job on each and every ship.

No one is paying to have them on every ship.
You, the ship owner are paying to have them on your ship, if you want them.
If the cost of security outweighs the risk of losing your ship, then you don't
need security.

Besides, I doubt tax-funded missile cruisers, helicopters and marines are
much cheaper to say the least.

[August]

Originally Posted by Letum

No one is paying to have them on every ship.
You, the ship owner are paying to have them on your ship, if you want them.
If the cost of security outweighs the risk of losing your ship, then you don't
need security.

Exactly. Which is why you don't see security on these ships.

[Letum]

Then if they don't think they need security; why give it to them?

If you don't buy locks for your doors, you can't complain if you are robbed.


ed: we can do some math here....How many ships sail through there per
month and how any are pirated each month?
What is the average cost to a shipping company per ship pirated?

[MothBalls]

Originally Posted by ={FH}=Paddy

As jimbuna mentioned, I see the use of “ferryman convoys” being the most realistic for the time being, rally point and drop off, return journey reciprocated etc.

It might not be realistic to do convoys. I don't know the exact numbers so I don't know how feasible it is. It could be hundreds of ships per day in both directions. It might just be a handful. Seems like it would be a massive effort to coordinate something like that.

Originally Posted by ={FH}=Paddy

As we speak we have a multinational maritime force insitu, British, American, Chinese, Dutch, and Australian, to mention but a few participating nations, yet still no eradication or even an element of prevention to date? Is the obvious being over looked?

I'd wonder how many ships and of what type all of them sent. From what I've read it's a token effort compared to the combined naval resources of the participating countries.

What do you think of the idea of sending a "boatload" of warships into the area. I mean so many to the point of obvious overkill. A Carrier group from each country, a slew of destroyers, air recon, etc. Throw everything at them, show them it's game over and it won't be tolerated. The sooner the better.

Some might argue that it's cost prohibitive to send that many resources. But the question needs to be asked; How much will it cost if we don't do it? There should be a sense of urgency to get this done. Every ransom paid is funding the construction of an enemy force. The stronger we make them, the tougher it will be to eliminate them. They're going to start buying more sophisticated weapons and very soon we're going to have a real war with real casualties.

That could be a possible solution. Or, it's quite possible the 4 pints of ale I just drank is just making me want to go out and bomb the living shiznit out of some pirates.

[={FH}=Paddy]

Originally Posted by MothBalls

Or, it's quite possible the 4 pints of ale I just drank is just making me want to go out and bomb the living shiznit out of some pirates.

:rotfl:

Here is an interesting link i came across, it also has a list of the top 20 "non lethal" methods to deter pirates -
http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/

Here are the suggestions - (Check out the "Dazzle Gun")
http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/an...iracy-somalia/

[Jimbuna]

Number 1 "Denial Of Ransom" has got to be the most serious contender here. In relation to the list that is.

[Etienne]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Number 1 "Denial Of Ransom" has got to be the most serious contender here. In relation to the list that is.

Would likely result in some crewmembers getting killed, or some ships getting scuttled.

A 100 000 DWT tanker getting scuttled would make for a mess of epic proportion...

please correct me if I am wrong but is it not an international maritime offence to carry weaponry through national shipping jurisdictions?

It isn't an offence , its just that each area of territorial waters has different firearm laws that go with their country , so you noy only have to comply with all the different laws in the ports you are stopping at you also have to comply with those of all the territorial waters you pass through . So a ship on a standard voyage might have to follow dozen different sets of laws and get a dozen different sets of paperwork if it wants to carry weapons .
Its OK if you are off on a cruise in your own boat and you have the time for all the papework or if you are on a regular commercial A-B run , but for most commercial traffic it just gets too complicated .

[={FH}=Paddy]

@ Tribesman: Thanks for the clarification on that; I was aware that there were restrictions but as you put it, it would be a bloody nightmare to have your comercial crew armed.

@ Etienne: Valid point you make there about scuttling of a ship on that scale, if one reads the BBC reports about the attempted boarding of the American flag ship “Liberty Sun” yesterday, this was the apparent only intention of the pirates. (Kill the crew and scuttle the ship in revenge for the recent fatal shooting of their fellow Beardies)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7999350.stm

@ all: Looks like the UN are paying this issue some lip service! - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8001102.stm

Let’s us see what the next course of action is that the international community decides to take to tackle this issue.
Quite honestly, I would not fancy my odds being a Somali pirate at the moment!

France – 14
USA – 4

…and counting

[Jimbuna]

The bottom line here has got to be adherence of the fundamental principle that people must face up to the consequences of their actions.

The sooner these people are educated/informed to this fact the sooner they can make an informed choice fully in the knowledge of the risks they are taking should they fail to heed the lesson.

[FIREWALL]

This has all the makeings of a Movie\ Tv series or Video game.