Pirates

[gf0012-aust]

Japan destroyer aids Singapore ship off Somalia

TOKYO: A Japanese destroyer on an anti-piracy mission off Somalia has given emergency protection to a Singapore-registered ship by chasing off four suspicious boats, the defence ministry said on Saturday.

The 4,650-tonne Sazanami, deployed to protect Japanese-registered vessels in and around the Gulf of Aden, received a radio call for help from the Singaporean ship at around 1740 GMT on Friday, the ministry said.

The warship issued a verbal warning through loudspeakers and beamed a searchlight at the four suspicious boats, which had been pursuing the Singaporean ship, a defence ministry spokeswoman said.

The four boats - one "sizable" vessel and three small boats - then left the area, the spokeswoman said, adding that neither side used weapons and that the four suspicious vessel were not identified.

The incident was Japan's first action against suspected pirates off Somalia since the Sazanami and the 4,550-tonne Samidare were dispatched to join an anti-piracy mission there last month.

The nation's armed forces could face combat abroad for the first time since World War II in the rare mission.

Japan's major past overseas missions - including in Iraq, near Afghanistan, and as UN peacekeepers - have been largely for logistical and support purposes such as refuelling, transport and reconstruction.

Under the pacifist constitution Japan adopted after World War II, the mission will allow its soldiers to use force only for self-defence and to protect Japanese interests, defined as its nationals, ships and cargo.

The ministry spokeswoman said the Japanese navy's action fell under the law of the sea which calls on any ships to assist vessels in distress.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/420066/1/.html

 

[malayphil]

Most of them are in the horn of Africa some are in South East Asia.

In Indonesia near the Malaya straits,also in the Southern Philippines.
The Malaya straits are important to Shipping pirates there must be destroyed by Malaysia and Indonesia..

 

[John Sansom]

Pirates must be "destroyed" period. However, we now have the rather peculiar case of the Alabama, a US (apparently) container vessel boarded some 300 miles offshore in the Gulf of Aden, and then having its 20-member American crew retake their own vessel, while losing their skipper to the pirates.

To date, the best info I have is that there were four--uh huh, four--pirates involved. One pirate was captured by the Alabama's crew who offered him up in exchange for the US skipper, taken in turn by the pirates and being held in one of the Alabama's lifeboats away from the larger vessel. The pirates allegedly agreed to the swap, then reneged, keeping the skipper and their own returned scumbag (oops...sorry).

A US destroyer is steaming to the....rescue?

Question: Isn't it a little unusual to see an American crew on a Maersk-owned ship of this calibre.....and where is the pirate mother ship? It's a bit of a stretch to believe that the small pirate runabouts could comfortably make the 300-mile run out to the Alabama (or, for that matter, the 600 mile round trip). Something (possibly) Q-ish seems to be going on here.

Oh, yeah. Way to go Yanks!

 

[SpudmanWP]

How to deal with piracy TODAY

Piracy has been with us, and will be with us, for as long as there are rich targets cruising around the ocean. We need a long-term plan and commitment to fight piracy wherever it may be.

Here are my thoughts on how to deal with our current situation.

I have both a civilian and a military plan.

Pick locations at either end, and in the middle of, the shipping lanes around the HoA (Horn of Africa).

Place a medium container ship to be used as a local Sea Base at each location. These containers would be BattleBoxes that would be used as sleeping quarters, supplies, and maintenance facilities for the crew.

As ships approach the HoA, a 4-man fire team would be flown out to the ship for the cruise around the HoA.

Each team would have multiple thermal cameras that can be mounted at the bow and stern of the ship to ensure 24/7 surveillance. Besides each person being armed with the appropriate small arms (pistol, SMG, and Assault Rifle), they would be armed with two 50 cal sniper rifles, one GPMG (7.62mm), and a stabilized video camera mount (for CYA).

When a threat approaches, it is captured on video and upon approval, the threat is eliminated from a long range via 50 cal and GPMG.

At the other end of the HoA, the fire team is remove from the ship and stays on the Sea Base container ship waiting for another ship to transit back the way they came.

Well, that is the civilian response as it only includes weapons and equipment available, legally, on the open market. As to the question about cost, the civilians (ie Blackwater or other Merc outfit) would charge the ship’s owners. They, in turn, would save the money from the insurance companies much like car alarms and LoJack save people today.

For a military op, just up the firepower and throw in Fire Scout UAVs, Hummingbird UAVs, and Bell_Eagle_Eye UAVs armed with DAGR A2G Missiles.

These small VTOL UAVs allows the area of protection to be extended and the time to send aid to remote locations lessened.

 

[swerve]

You'd need a lot of guards to cover all the ships moving through the danger area, & several bases. The pirates are operating hundreds of miles offshore, in an area over 1000 miles north-south. 20000 annual ship movements just through the Gulf of Aden, & thousands more on the longer threatened routes.

To provide round the clock protection, four guards would not be enough. Man's gotta sleep.

 

[SpudmanWP]

4 is plenty... rotate shifts and the ship's bridge crew would also monitor the cameras. The cameras themselves could alert the team when an object comes within 200 meters or so. You could also have a surface scan radar at each camera mount to increase the chance of detection.

20000 ships over 365 days is 54 per day. A ship traveling 10 knots would traverse the area in 1 week.

50 (ships) * 7 (days) * 4 (team) = 1400 team members

Now, the reason this works is several fold:

1. Because carriers can plan ahead of time, the Sea Base ships will not be overcrowded since the teams will be rotating between carriers.

2. You do not have to protect every ship, just the ones that are likely targets who are plum targets or too slow.

3. As of now, pirates that approach a ship and are rebuffed with water or other means are free to attack others. Under my plan, they die and are thereby unable to attack any other targets.

4. By utilizing a commercial (civilian) solution, countries will not be sucked into situations where their sailors could be captured and hauled in front of the cameras.

For those of you who may say "But they have not killed anybody, we need to capture them and try them in courts", President Madison once said

the United States whilst they wish for war with no nation will buy peace with none. It is a principle incorporated into the settled policy of America that as peace is better than war war is better than tribute.

If we continue to handle them with kid gloves and pay the ransoms, they will continue to be a problem.

 

[Jecito]

Arming ships while sounds like a good idea would not work, which is why it isn´t done now. Some ships already use unarmed private security usually using hoses or other non-lethal means. A professional armed security detachment would be expensive (Thousands of $$$ daily), and bring insurance and liability problems. What would their ROE be? Remember the experience of Blackwater and civilian deaths in Iraq. Nobody wants to see mercs shooting up innocent fisherman on the high seas.
At the moment it is rare that pirates kill the captured crew, they are usually released unharmed. Having a firefight on board a ship would change that, and may antagonise the pirates enough to kill the crew if they manage to capture it. You may also damage the ship and cargo, imagine a firefight with RPG´s on an oil tanker. If a ship has an armed crew it probably means that it has something very valuable on it, and you invite the pirates to escalate as well and send more pirates and attack in larger groups, so your 4 man team soon needs to grow to 10, 15 20....

Some military solutions to the problem would be to implement a convoy system aka WW II, all ships travel under military escort, which is not really that practicable given the amount of ships transiting the area. Or to strike the pirates ashore, which brings political issues as well as mission creep (Where do you stop? Remember 1993 Blackhawk down etc...)which is probably why it hasn´t been done yet.

The only solution is to restore functional government to Somalia. Probably not feasible without a huge investment. The piracy problem arose from fisherman who employed local militias to stop foreign fishing ships that were illegally overfishing in Somali waters, as their was no navy/coast guard to protect their livelihood, they turned vigilante, and from there it escalated to the piracy we see today.

The thing is the status quo whereby the pirates capture the ships, the insurance companies pay the ransom money and release the crew and cargo unharmed is the lesser evil. Which is why you rarely see pirates killing the crew or destroying the ship, especially if they are from western countries, that would cross a line that would probably demand a greater military response as well as affect their ransom. The risks of armed security on ships outweigh the benefits and that is the reason why they are not used.

 

[Ananda]

Tackle on the sources

when in 1998 ourthen dictactor soeharto step down..all chaos came arround including seperatist in aceh becoming much bolder and targeting merchant ships for additional funding sources..ex soeharto military command cronnies turning blind eyes on 'priveteer' activities in malaca straits and our portion of south china sea...and basiccaly incompetent government that come arround after the dictactors stepping down..

It took:
- Tsunamies (on quelling rebellious aceh)
- Cooperations with Malaysia & Singapore,
- Rooting out ex soeharto military cronnies,
- Getting/rejuvenated our patrol forces,
- and Basiccaly more competent government after 2005..
To reduced the piracy incidents in our waters and conjuctions sea lanes..This already poven by lower piracy incurance policy costs for malacan straits and conjuction indonesian and SEA water lanes.

It's not entirally gone..more prudent policing still need continue to developed..but the idea still the same...you have to tacle the piracy in the sources...by letting better governing on the area to developed..

With the situations in Somalia for instances..Whatever the tactical idea that comming around it will only adding costs..and in interim time might be reducing the incidents...but it will come again and again..and they will addapt...since no policing in the sources...
Investment should be to create stable and relatively capable government in Somalia..other than that...the waters will still be highly pirates inffested for decades to come.

 

[kato]

The cameras themselves could alert the team when an object comes within 200 meters or so.

200 Meters? By the time the other members of the team are at their weapons, the ship will be boarded. And once adaption has set in, at this point the bridge might just have received 3-4 RPGs as a "precaution".
Besides, pretty much all shipside force protection teams in naval infantry work at squad level minimum. For good reasons.

4. By utilizing a commercial (civilian) solution, countries will not be sucked into situations where their sailors could be captured and hauled in front of the cameras.

At least 80% of the target group would never utilize such a commercial solution - simply for both cost reason (4 men for a week? We're talking 25k per transfer as minimum then, with a Western PMC about 50k) and time reasons. If a ship currently can't even wait 8 hours for the convoy, it won't make the rendezvous with two "carriers" either. 6 hours of extra transfer time can cost a Western transport company on say a 5000-TEU container ship about 5 Million Dollar just for the increased container rental times. Easily.

Oh, and of course you'll need to find someone who actually insures such an enterprise. With the risk involved, you can double the cost number given above due to the premiums.

President Madison

... and that statement led to Washington burning.

 

[Pre-Dreadnought]

I would agree with convoys through dangerous waters. This would act as a deterrent ensuring the ships get through safely but would not remove pirates from the seas. However, what about the return of Q ships? Suitably armed they would destroy any vessels attempting to capture them. We should be eliminating this scourge of the seas with real force. We are not up against terrorists, but pirates in the old fashionned sense of the word. They must be dealt with harshly.

And we must NEVER pay them.

 

[IPA35]

We should sink pirate ships.
If this won't work block the ports.

Find a long therm solution, or attack.

 

[swerve]

4 is plenty... rotate shifts and the ship's bridge crew would also monitor the cameras. The cameras themselves could alert the team when an object comes within 200 meters or so. You could also have a surface scan radar at each camera mount to increase the chance of detection.

20000 ships over 365 days is 54 per day. A ship traveling 10 knots would traverse the area in 1 week.

50 (ships) * 7 (days) * 4 (team) = 1400 team members

Now, the reason this works is several fold:
...
2. You do not have to protect every ship, just the ones that are likely targets who are plum targets or too slow.

3. As of now, pirates that approach a ship and are rebuffed with water or other means are free to attack others. Under my plan, they die and are thereby unable to attack any other targets.

4. By utilizing a commercial (civilian) solution, countries will not be sucked into situations where their sailors could be captured and hauled in front of the cameras.

For those of you who may say "But they have not killed anybody, we need to capture them and try them in courts", President Madison once said

If we continue to handle them with kid gloves and pay the ransoms, they will continue to be a problem.

Many arguments against this, of which some have already been given.

As said, 200 metres is nowhere near enough. Your sleeping 4 man team would be heading for their guns when they met pirates.

You have not taken account of downtime. You need to double the numbers to account for it. Your guards will not work 365 days a year. You also need to allow for the several thousand ship movements in other directions than through the Gulf of Aden. You have not taken account of the time & effort to mount the expensive equipment you propose. Will your 4 guards do that? You are failing to account for the size of some ships. How many angles can four men cover, even when alerted, on a 200K ton ship? You have not allowed for the diversion of shipping to pass the sea base ships, you have wrongly assumed shipping is regularly spaced (it isn't: some days there will be fewer ships, some days more - you need to cope with the peaks). Oh, so much you haven't allowed for.

2. Wrong. Look at the ships which have been hijacked. There is no pattern, no "plum targets". They include everything from yachts & trawlers to supertankers.

3. The Somali pirates have taken care, so far, not to kill (unlike, for example, those operating in the South China Sea). We do not want to change that. A "shoot to kill policy" would kill a lot of seamen before it stopped piracy. Some solutions are worse than the problem.

4. This doesn't make sense to me. Please explain.

 

[swerve]

We should sink pirate ships.
If this won't work block the ports.

Find a long therm solution, or attack.

1. Identify them. Difficult. The Indian navy, for example, sank what it thought was a pirate mother ship, and killed a dozen Thai fishermen.
2. They use another port. There are plenty of small harbours along the coast of Somalia.
3. Attack what? Every fisherman in Somalia?

 

[swerve]

I would agree with convoys through dangerous waters. This would act as a deterrent ensuring the ships get through safely but would not remove pirates from the seas. However, what about the return of Q ships? Suitably armed they would destroy any vessels attempting to capture them. We should be eliminating this scourge of the seas with real force. We are not up against terrorists, but pirates in the old fashionned sense of the word. They must be dealt with harshly.

And we must NEVER pay them.

There is already a convoy system through the highest-risk area, as well as heavily-patrolled transit lanes with a reporting system. Most commercial ships prefer not to use convoys because of the time penalty, & some choose to take their chances outside the lanes.

Despite this, the convoys & transit lanes have been fairly effective, & have caused changes in pirate behaviour, e.g. the long-distance attacks out in the Indian Ocean, where no such system operates.

Q ships - how many? You'd need quite a few to be effective.

 

[Sampanviking]

How many Pirates can you buy off on shore to protect your ships for a fraction of the cost of extra security, ransoms and delayed delivery times?

Quite a lot I would say and if by paying a little money, you keep these guys busy fighting each other in Puntland all the better. Do bear in mind that if there was a sovereign government in Somalia, we would probably be giving them aid and technical assistance to combat Piracy so ultimately what real difference is there?

 

[OPSSG]

SpudmanWP, there is another thread on Pirates here, that deals with some of your concerns.
[Mod edit]Thanks for that reminder. I've merged the threads[/mod edit]

when in 1998 our then dictactor Soeharto step down... all chaos came around including separatist in aceh becoming much bolder and targeting merchant ships for additional funding sources..ex soeharto military command cronnies turning blind eyes on 'priveteer' activities in Malacca Straits and our portion of south china sea...and basically incompetent government that come around after the dictator stepping down..

It took:
- Tsunamies (on quelling rebellious aceh)
- Cooperations with Malaysia & Singapore,
- Rooting out ex soeharto military cronies,
- Getting/rejuvenated our patrol forces,
- and Basiccaly more competent government after 2005..
To reduced the piracy incidents in our waters and conjuctions sea lanes..This already proven by lower piracy insurance policy costs for Malacca Straits...

It's not entirely gone..more prudent policing still need continue to developed..but the idea still the same...you have to tackle the piracy in the sources...by letting better governing on the area to developed..

With the situations in Somalia for instances..Whatever the tactical idea that coming around it will only adding costs..and in interim time might be reducing the incidents...but it will come again and again..and they will adapt...since no policing in the sources...

Investment should be to create stable and relatively capable government in Somalia..other than that...the waters will still be highly pirates infested for decades to come.

Ananda, I totally agree that piracy is a multi-faceted problem and we need to tackle the piracy in the source, which in the case of piracy in the Gulf of Arden, the failed state of Somalia. I would like to add that piracy is also a problem of organized crime. I previously posted this ISEAS link on dealing with piracy in SE Asia in the older thread, if you are interested.

Even the Singapore navy (RSN) has finally got in with the act and on 9 April 2009 dispatched RSS Persistence (an Endurance Class vessel) in support of the multinational Combined Task Force 151. This RSN vessel carries 240 personnel (army, navy and air force), 2 RSAF Super Puma helicopters and the usual boarding teams. This class of vessel often carries UAVs and USVs. I note that the ScanEagle had just completed its trials on an Endurance Class vessel.

 

[IPA35]

1. Identify them. Difficult. The Indian navy, for example, sank what it thought was a pirate mother ship, and killed a dozen Thai fishermen.
2. They use another port. There are plenty of small harbours along the coast of Somalia.
3. Attack what? Every fisherman in Somalia?

Those small motorboats what attack the ship, sink them.

If a ship is boarded, reboard it before it is sailed to a port.

Attack those ports...

 

[kev 99]

Those small motorboats what attack the ship, sink them.

If a ship is boarded, reboard it before it is sailed to a port.

Attack those ports...

There's a lot of them many of which would be small harbours or bays, the larger ones contain lots of innocent civilians and the collateral damage would potentially be huge.

 

[swerve]

Those small motorboats what attack the ship, sink them.

If a ship is boarded, reboard it before it is sailed to a port.

Attack those ports...

1. You can't sink every small boat. You usually have to be there when they do it to get a positive ID. That is extremely difficult, as there's a lot of sea, with a lot of ships in it, & they're deliberately avoiding warships. When not actually attacking ships, they pretend to be innocent fishermen or the like.

2. You try - without getting the crew killed. Why do you think it hasn't been done much? Because after the first couple of successful rescues, the pirates learned to make it too risky.

3. They'll use another one. And most of the people in each of the ports they use are innocent bystanders who were living there before someone in the neighbourhood took up piracy. Too much collateral damage.

 

[SpudmanWP]

200 meters may be short.. I was just giving an example. You can make it 2km if you want.

The equipment itself can be in a self contained, water proof container that attaches to the flat deck via magnetic clamps. Very easy to setup.

There is no viable reason that a small boat approaches a container ship on the high-seas and chases you down. At that point they only have one purpose in mind.

We have to stop codling these pirates. They will continue to attack our shipping vessels until it becomes too dangerous for them to do otherwise.

As to the cost, what are the shipping companies paying in increased insurance fees when they transit this area?