Printable View
At last! From an unexpected partner too:Link:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...i-pirates.htmlQuote:
.stormed a hijacked ship off Somalia, killing eight pirates, arresting five and releasing the crew of 21 to safety.
Added later, Malaysian action in the Gulf of Oman, pirates arrested:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12258442
A well known UK retired journalist was aboard a cruise ship that was attacked, so some value in his article and then he adds a lot of familiar context, almost a litany of criticism:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/tr...i-pirates.html
David:
A very interesting article. Two quotes jumped out at me.
andQuote:
But a Ministry of Defence directive since has forbidden RN captains to confront or arrest pirates "for fear of breaching their human rights.
What more can be said?Quote:
The safest ships of all are flying the Russian flag: armed guards aboard them simply blow pirate boats out of the water and leave any survivors to drown. Attacks on Russian vessels have abruptly ceased.
Thanks David !
I really enjoyed the comments from Peter... He could in fact be our very own Council Member JMA both sharing a fondness for missile attacks ;)
We've said this before in many of the Africa threads...Quote:
Following a ship being taken by pirates here is the sequence of events -
1) Follow ship
2) Cruise missile attack any settlement near where ever the ship anchors
3) Cruise missile attack any satellite phone call trying to arrange ransom
4) If vessel and crew not released - continue 1 to 3
5) If crew harmed obliterate all settlements with in 15 miles of where the ship is anchored - repeat doubling the radius of destruction for each offense
If we are not prepared to play by their rules then we should not be there. Even if someone finally manages to prosecute pirates that life behind bars will probably be hundreds of times better than life as a Somali.
The South Koreans have managed to both kill pirates and take any survivors home for prosecution !
Well Stan who ever that Peter is his plan would work. This Somali based piracy would be finished in a week. But which country has the balls to do that? Russia maybe, any number of African countries if they had the means, certainly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
It would be a step in the right direction to accept that what Peter says would wrap it all up very quickly and with the acceptance that what is being attempted currently is not dealing with the core and home base of the problem.
Agree fully with that. If you can't be there then use proxies.Quote:
We've said this before in many of the Africa threads...
If we are not prepared to play by their rules then we should not be there.
Arrest them? Is there some Law of the Sea fine print which demands that they be arrested? What happens if they fire a shot?Quote:
Even if someone finally manages to prosecute pirates that life behind bars will probably be hundreds of times better than life as a Somali.
Recently, the South Korean, Malaysian and Indian navies have dealt with pirates decisively, TIA decisively. The Indians have acted in the last few days. All those navies are non-European. I think that interesting.
Hey JMA,Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
I'm of the same opinion. The State Department already hashes out their deeds to contractors, so what would be the big deal this time around ? Although, "lowest bidder to a government contract" would probably mean no cruise missiles :D
Hmmm, just what is the fine print in the Law of the Sea anyway ? Is there such a thing ?Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
For reasons that elude me, from a landlubbers armchair, the reported mother ships for the pirates have escaped attention. So congratulations to the Danish warship:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12442330
Note the impressive map on the range of attacks.
http://ap.stripes.com/dynamic/storie...02-16-10-32-49
another view is if we did follow the good captain's advice we may not have 700 seafarers held hostage in Somalia, and of course Jacqueline didn't offer any other suggestions for suppressing this problem.Quote:
Jacqueline Smith, president of the Norwegian Seafarers Union, described Stolt-Nielsen's views as "barbaric" and said killing pirates could endanger the 700 seafarers now held as hostages in Somalia
Here is another story about what the Norwegian said.
http://www.marinelog.com/index.php?o...ews&Itemid=107
There is a Norwegian movie that I like called The Last Lieutenant. In it the protaganist (sic), a beached Norwegian merchant sea captain is making a bomb to blow up Germans. One of the other characters asked him where he learned to do that and he replied that this is what they used on pirates off the coast of west Africa. Glad to see things don't change much.
Viva Norway.
We're talking criminals, violent criminals who are having a growing impact on modern economies. There is nothing to negotiate, they have no political agenda and to date their risk as been very limited.
Is there a law of the sea that actually permits killing pirates on the spot? Is there a law that prohibits it?
What are the drawbacks from a more agressive policy?
What other options are feasible?
It's not really accurate to say the pirates have no political agenda. There are numerous quotes from captured Somali pirates in which they say they see themselves as an unofficial Coast Guard. A lot of that is just posturing, but Somalis are aware of the political situation in which they are embroiled, and politics are certainly the driving force behind the rise in piracy. Somalis turn to piracy because they don't have any other good options for survival. Their waters have been emptied of sea life by illegal non-Somali fishing operations and poisoned by illegal non-Somali waste-dumping operations. Whether or not that justifies piracy is arguable, but it's inarguable that if you put people in a desperate situation they will inevitably turn to desperate, and probably violent, measures.
Because the root cause is political, the solution can also be political. The cost effective solution is to simply kill Somali pirates whenever there gets to be too many. Whether that solution--especially that solution alone, with no attempt made to address the root issue--is morally or ethically defensible is, again, arguable.
Posted by motorfirebox,I enjoyed your post and while I'm not aware of the allegations you are making I suspect they're all very much true and "contribute" to the raise of piracy.Quote:
Because the root cause is political, the solution can also be political. The cost effective solution is to simply kill Somali pirates whenever there gets to be too many. Whether that solution--especially that solution alone, with no attempt made to address the root issue--is morally or ethically defensible is, again, arguable.
Political is a hard to define, because war is political, and if we decide to take more draconian measures against the pirates that would obviously be a political decision/solution also. I think I know what you mean, but since there is not an effective State structure to represent Somalia in the modern sense, and the West has demonstrated reluctance for nation building (being reinforced due to Afgahnistan and Iraq), what political solution would you recommend?
I agree that more aggressive is not the solution alone, but at this point based on what I think I know it definitely plays a role to initially suppress this activity. It is also arguable that allows one's citizens to be held hostage by criminals is also immoral. I realize it is more convoluted than that with ships that are frequently flagged by one country and manned by another (or multi-national crews), but regardless those conducted legimate sea trade are innocent victims. If the Somalis attacked those conducting illegal fishing in their waters then that wouldn't be a major global concern. Instead their attacking and kidnapping all ships (are you aware of any exceptions)? Second point, if this goes unchallenged we're going to send a signal to other areas of the world that piracy is a lucrative business. SE Asian nations have done a relatively good job on cracking down and reducing piracy in recent years, but based on the Somali experience they and others may want to relook the risk versus gain equation for conducting this type of activity.
Actually, they do - 2007 Commander's Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations.pdf
Yes, if they resist or flee (Tennessee v Garner probably would allow deadly force); but usually it's Rule of Law (international law enforcement) - see snip attached:Quote:
from Bill
Is there a law of the sea that actually permits killing pirates on the spot? Is there a law that prohibits it?
Now, you will undoubtedly find some historical evidence of pirates being hanged on the spot.Quote:
3.5.3 Use of Naval Forces to Repress Piracy
Only warships, military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on governmental service and authorized to that effect, may seize a pirate ship or aircraft.
3.5.3.1 Seizure of Pirate Vessels and Aircraft
A pirate vessel or aircraft encountered in or over U.S. or international waters may be seized and detained by any of the U.S. vessels or aircraft listed in paragraph 3.5.3. The pirate vessel or aircraft, and all persons on board, should be taken, sent, or directed to the nearest U.S. port or airfield and delivered to U.S. law enforcement authorities for disposition according to U.S. law. Alternatively, higher authority may arrange with another nation to accept and try the pirates and dispose of the pirate vessel or aircraft, since every nation has jurisdiction under international law over any act of piracy.
However, the SROEs default to self-defense and seizure:
So, that's present legal reality for US ships.Quote:
(5) Piracy. US warships and aircraft have an obligation to repress piracy on or over international waters directed against any vessel, or aircraft, whether US or foreign flagged and are authorized to employ all means necessary to repress piratical acts. For ships and aircraft repressing an act of piracy, the right and obligation of self defense extends to persons, vessels, or aircraft assisted. If a pirate vessel or aircraft fleeing from pursuit proceeds into the territorial sea, archipelagic waters, or superjacent airspace of another country, every effort should be made to obtain the consent of the coastal state prior to continuation of the pursuit.
---------------------------
This is hypothetical.
If the conflict with the pirates were an "armed conflict" (Declaration of War or AUMF), the members of the targeted pirate group could be designated as a "hostile force" (from SROEs):
Note that, even under the Laws of War, summary executions (e.g., in a field commander's discretion) have been barred since WWI - though trial by military tribunal is still theoretically possible.Quote:
5. ... i. Hostile Force. Any civilian, paramilitary, or military force or terrorist(s), with or without national designation, that has committed a hostile act, exhibited hostile intent, or has been declared hostile by appropriate US authority.
6. Declaring Forces Hostile. Once a force is declared hostile by appropriate authority, US units need not observe a hostile act or a demonstration of hostile intent before engaging that force. The responsibility for exercising the right and obligation of national self defense and as necessary declaring a force hostile is a matter of the utmost importance. All available intelligence, the status of international relationships, the requirements of international law, an appreciation of the political situation, and the potential consequences for the United States must be carefully weighed. The exercise of the right and obligation of national self-defense by competent authority is separate from and in no way limits the commander’s right and obligation to exercise unit self-defense. The authority to declare a force hostile is limited as amplified in Appendix A of this Enclosure.
Regards
Mike
I think not. I think those that are doing piracy are doing it because it is exciting (always a plus for violent teenager), it is lucrative and it is easier than working. There are lots of poor countries on the ocean that don't have pirates, have been throughout history. There wasn't much piracy off that part of Africa 10 years ago. But now there is. Somebody had an inspiration and it paid off and, man being inclined to adopt good ideas, all the other Somalis in that area imitated. And boy is it paying off. Plus add in that the pirates are...Somalis. They are rather inclined to mayhem.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
The cause isn't political, it is criminal. Or I guess you could call it political if the political culture is criminal, which being that part of Africa it probably is. But that is a distinction without a difference. You deal with it like you deal with any criminal, you kill him or frighten him into submission.
Besides, TIA man, TIA.
Those factors are certainly part of it. But they're part of any society. There are several factors that Somalia has which many other societies lack. One is opportunity; the Gulf of Aden is an incredibly target-rich environment. Piracy off the Puntland coast has been an issue for quite a long time, now--it was a problem long before the media caught ahold of it, and it continues to be a problem after the media lost interest. The IUC which arose as a system of government in the early to mid 2000s struggled with piracy and brought incidence of piracy down sharply.
Which leads to another factor that is, if not unique to Somalia, then at least fairly select: Somalia's government has been a hilarious farce, completely lacking anything resembling authority over the state. The one organization that had begun to restore order was crushed by our proxies, the Ethiopians.
Which, in turn, leads to the most salient factor: without a functional state, there's nobody to keep out the fishers and the dumpers. And without that, there is no alternative to piracy available. Sure, there are some, maybe even many, who simply said "Hell with it, why should I work when I can take hostages and get paid for it?" But there are a lot more who said "I'm not making any money fishing, I have to get money somehow, those pirates seem to be doing okay; I think I'll try it myself."
To simply blame Somalis for being Somalian is short-sighted in the extreme. Not that it was ever a paradise, but Somalia is a smoking crater now because of outside intervention. In such a situation, there actually isn't any good alternative to picking up a gun. Frightening criminals into submission is only an option when alternatives to criminality exist.
You are very right the Gulf of Aden makes for rich pickings, but I don't see many pirates from the other countries that surround the place. The Straits of Malacca are good pickings. Not much piracy there now, most all the pirates are dead, killed by the tidal wave. But the economic conditions in that area are the same, just the criminals are dead, so no piracy, at least for a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
If you are talking about al Shabaab as the agent that was going to do us all a big favor by restoring order, you may be interested in this Rueters story about how they grabbed some pirate kings because they weren't happy with their cut of the ransoms.
http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...71G6KN20110217
Now as for piracy being just retribution for spoiled fishing grounds being exacted by wronged fisherman, they seem to go pretty far out to sea for that. I am not sure the coastal waters of India were their traditional fishing grounds, maybe though.
Ultimately, none of this makes any difference. Their won't be any functional law abiding government there for years to come if ever. Somalia is a smoking crater mostly because Somalis are violent. That isn't going to change either. So we can weep for the Somalis and put up with innocent men who had nothing to do with the thing being kidnapped and killed, and we can pay more and more money to thugs who will continue to kidnap and kill more seamen who are just trying to make a living; or we can take care of the pirates the way pirates have been taken care of throughout history. It is going to come to that anyway. It will be cheaper to just get it over with even if Oprah chides the Navies for not being enlightened.
An addendum: Somaliland seems to run well. We should recognize the place. So not all Somalis are hopeless, just most that don't live in Somaliland.
I was referring to the ICU, not al Shabaab. al Shabaab is a pack of violent terrorists--all that remains after Ethiopia smashed the law and order the ICU was building.
It is ridiculous to hold Somali pirates accountable for straying outside their national waters if the same accountability is not demanded of the fishers and dumpers from other nations.
As for your ideas about the violence inherent in Somalis--unless you're a proponent of the worst sort of eugenics, you have to accept that there are causes for Somali violence that extend beyond Somalis simply being a violent people. I have shown evidence of what that cause is; reject it if you like, but you haven't provided an alternative explanation.
And again, simply killing or arresting them isn't going to work. It didn't work at any other point in history, either--the golden age of western piracy didn't end because all the pirates got blowed up, it ended because conditions changed and improved to make that sort of criminal activity impractical. So in that sense, I completely agree with you: we should take care of Somali pirates the way pirates have been taken care of throughout history.
Actually it isn't so ridiculous. If you physically hold a gun to a man's head and say do this or I will kill you, and on occasion do so just to show that you are serious, that is rather a different matter than poaching. It won't be much consolation to the families of dead and missing seaman to tell them "your loved one doesn't matter, we can't protect him because it wouldn't be fair." Those loved ones probably won't buy that. They probably won't buy the "Those poor fellows don't have any other way to make a living" argument either.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
I just know what I read and I try to read people who seem to know what they are about. One of those guys is Tom Odom. He wrote about Somalia. He said they don't like anybody else in that region and nobody likes them. There was a reason no roads led in or out of the place. He also advised that the ROE that should have been adopted when we went into that place years ago was this. If somebody is seen with a gun, he is shot. If anybody picks up the gun, he is shot. He said given the character of the place, that is the only thing that would work.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
One of the reasons piracy became impractical was because the Royal Navy or American Navy or somebody's navy came after them and killed them. One of the other reasons was because people in the area knew that if they went pirating a navy of some sort would kill them. That was one of the reasons things were sort of peaceful in the Med when the Romans were around. Their navy hunted pirates down and killed them. The Romans probably weren't inclined to be gentle with pirates. Worked for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
This is what will be done eventually.
You are shifting your goalposts. Your initial comment was about territory--that Somali piracy could not be a response to fishing incursions because Somali pirates operate as far away as the coast of India. As I said, holding that sort of double standard is ridiculous. As for the actual act of piracy, I'm inclined to believe that starving Somali families are similarly disinterested in how the families of their hostages feel. Stealing your food and leaving you to starve to death is only different from shooting you in terms of how long it takes you to die.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
That doesn't at all address why such a state of affairs exists. If you want to believe it exists because Somalis are genetically predisposed to violence, or whatever, well, feel free.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
Yes, the presence of law and order does stymie piracy. I don't recall saying otherwise. Of course, you're ignoring or forgetting that those same nations frequently commissioned pirates to strike at their enemies' shipping lanes.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
I honestly doubt it. I don't think anyone cares enough to make that sort of expenditure.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
But the Somalis are not straying outside their territorial waters to catch fish they are doing so as the foot soldiers of an internationally organised crime syndicate specializing in piracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
Carl, as long as the school of thought, that criminals are excused their actions by their poverty or some claim that their poverty can be blamed on others, has influence then quite frankly you have a snow-balls chance in hell of sorting the problems out.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
Take the poppy cultivation in Afghanistan for example. The same woolly thinking has prevailed (and the "yes Sir, no Sir, three bags full Sir" military has blindly followed this insanity).
All that said and as far as the threat of Somali piracy is concerned is it not sickeningly predictable that the ship owners and shipping companies rather than spend to protect their crews they call on their nations and even the (useless) UN to protect their ships.
When can we expect a law suit in the US by a hijacked US crew against their employer (the ship owner) for failing in the duty of care to protect them from the very evident and obvious risk of piracy in that area? Would not the Seaman's Union or equivalent not be the instrument for such a class action suit?
In this case, it's the same thing through more direct means. The only practical difference is that the illegal fishing trawlers aren't waiting until Somali fishermen have hauled up a netfull of fish to steal them. And then, of course, there's the illegal dumping of waste, which is far crueler, far more callous, and far more deleterious to the health of far more people than high seas hostage-taking ever will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
It's not about excusing actions. It's about recognizing why those actions are taken and addressing the causes.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
And this is unique to Somalia? ... and this justifies the acts of piracy which bring in incomes beyond their wildest dreams as subsistence fishermen?Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
Well yes... but at the same time dealing with the piracy in the most effective manner... which is not happening.Quote:
It's not about excusing actions. It's about recognizing why those actions are taken and addressing the causes.
PS: It would help your argument if these Somali fishermen were targeting the boats that illegally fish in the Somali territorial waters or those that dump their garbage in passing... but they are not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
I'm quite sure that this illegal waste dumping story (I've seen it before) is a hoax.
It sounds a lot like a Rube Goldberg machine solution to a problem.
European are supposedly sending ships through the Suez Canal (fee!), through the Red Sea into the Indian Ocean to dump waste? I'm supposed to believe that?
Hello, we've got an Atlantic Ocean and a pretty large Mediterranean Sea right in front of our harbours!
Moreover, it requires special equipment on aircraft to suppress illegal oil dumping close to our shores (and few European nations afford this equipment). It ought to be much easier (and leave almost no traces) to dump some illegal waste on the high seas at night (dumping oil illegally leaves a trace that identifies the miscreant ship for hours - simple waste dumping does not).
Unique? No. Fairly select, though. And certainly the worst example of a trend.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
Again, though, I'm not talking about justification. It's not a choice between being okay with piracy or okay with illegal fishing and dumping. I condemn both. I condemn the fishing and dumping more because a) it hurts more people, and b) without it, piracy would go down.
Of course they're not, any more than ye olde tyme privateers hunted the warships of enemy states. Again, it's not nationalism or profit motive.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
Posted by JMA,
I have no knowledge in this field, but I recall when I was looking at security jobs in the early 90s, private Maritime Security was a supposedly a rapidly growing school. There were a few private schools training and credentialing private armed security personnel to protect ships from pirates (as you all have noted it is an old problem).Quote:
All that said and as far as the threat of Somali piracy is concerned is it not sickeningly predictable that the ship owners and shipping companies rather than spend to protect their crews they call on their nations and even the (useless) UN to protect their ships.
The shipping companies were apparently paying the security personnel back then. What I don't see (doesn't mean it isn't happening) now are these armed private maritime security companies on board ships. What happened? Were they shut down by the UN? Did the liberals take legal action against them? Is this still a legal option?
JMA,
Well said, and it goes back to identifying underlyng issues in any conflict. They tend to distract or worse prohibit us from winning the immediate fight. Most underlying issues (assuming they're correct identified in the first place) take years to solve, and once the armed conflict starts governments would probably be better off focusing on attacking the threat directly (in most cases) and then focusing on longer term solutions. Right now we're paralyzing ourselves by feeling sorry for our enemies. That may give some the impression that we have the moral high ground, but not the families that are burying their fallen warriors, not the families who are worried about the status of their family members being held hostage, and not the folks who are beginning to feel the economic impact (on top of everything) of this paralysis that prevents action. Moral high ground needs to be looked at in another light IMO.Quote:
Carl, as long as the school of thought, that criminals are excused their actions by their poverty or some claim that their poverty can be blamed on others, has influence then quite frankly you have a snow-balls chance in hell of sorting the problems out.
The UN has no such authority and I don't recall an international shipping treaty of relevance from the last decades.
The corporations which operate these ships have hired cheap Filipino labour in the meantime, and are not intent on paying security professionals if they can have a free ride on ridiculously inefficient naval security efforts.
There actually are PMCs protecting some ships.
motorfirebox, thanks for the link to the article, but what isn't clear to me yet is that it? Case opened and closed, or will there be a painful and expensive investigation that follows? If the companies only had to pay for armed security that wouldn't cost too much even if the security personnel earned a handsome income, but legal fees on the other hand could get out of control.
There's no legal fees if there's no investigation. If a PMC shoots up a bunch of pirates, who's going to report it? The shipping company doesn't want it reported because they don't want their insurance premiums to go up. The PMC more than likely has an agreement in place to not report any incidents for the same reason. And the pirates themselves probably wouldn't report it even if they had anyone to report it to--they're the pirates, after all.
In one of the articles David linked to, it is mentioned that Russian flagged ships have security (I don't know what kind) on board. If they are attacked by pirates they shoot up and sink the pirate vessel and leave the pirates in the water. No investigation ensues. The article also states that Russian flagged ships are not attacked attacked anymore.
From my post a while back.
The Germans are the first clients and the Estonian Navy confirmed their personnel are already being deployed. These are sort of SEAL teams, not some private company though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Someone earlier asked about solutions, and I didn't remember to reply until now. The solution I would propose would be to pump more money and training into the burgeoning Somali navy, building it from a small force of marines into an actual navy--or, rather, a coast guard--with some level of blue water capability. Help them fight piracy, but also help them fight the illegal fishing and dumping operations which are a major driver behind the piracy. Simultaneously, start cracking down on illegal fishing and especially illegal dumping ourselves. People eat this stuff, for chrissake, we shouldn't be okay with nuclear fish.
Not a perfect solution, not a total solution, but a start and something that has a much better chance of working than simply shooting pirates.
Somali Navy Admiral Optimistic about Pirate Fight; but that was in Jan 2010.
On the other hand, from Dec 2010, another voice - of pessimism, Does Somalia’s New Pirate-Fighting Militia Stand a Chance? (original source "Wired"):
RegardsQuote:
Multi-billion-dollar warships, Navy SEAL snipers, Marine assault teams, mercenaries, Reaper drones, sonic beam guns and even improvised firebombs hurled by desperate fishermen: the world has tried everything short of a full-scale invasion to beat Somali pirates. The newest idea is a local pirate-fighting militia. But it’s doubtful that this tactic will be much more successful than the last half-dozen. ... (more in article).
Mike
The obvious solution stares one in the face.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmm99
Again I suggest that this be recorded as the best solution but due to diplomatic sensitivities and gutless political weakness is not on the table.
I'm not yet willing to equate an aversion to mass slaughter with gutless political weakness. The gutless political weakness was most flagrantly displayed back in 2006, when we sent in Ethiopia to break the back of the IUC.
What we are talking about here isn't mass slaughter, it is selective slaughter, confined to some rapacious Somali teenagers on little boats out at sea. The advantage of that is it avoids going onto the shore where there are more innocent people around to get caught in a cross fire. The other advantage is the rapacious Somali teenagers are concentrated in small area, the boat, so you don't have to chase them hither and thither.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
Unwillingness to do that is simple fecklessness. I think shooting bunches of pirates at sea would do wonders to reduce and maybe almost eliminate piracy in the area. You do not. We disagree.
I still think it interesting that non-western countries seem to be the ones that are beginning to take the hard actions needed. The western countries mostly fret.
Er, no. I'm not opposed to engaging pirates who are engaged in piracy. I'm not even opposed to engaging pirates on shore. I'm opposed to viewing the engagement of pirates as a whole solution. And thus far, we haven't been all that reticent about engaging pirates, at least at sea.
I find it fairly uninformed to talk about "rapacious Somali teenagers". Not that they don't exist, and in great numbers, but we ourselves--the western countries, specifically the US--bear a large part of the blame for their proliferation. I hate to keep harping on it (lies, it's one of my favorite things to bitch about), but the last time Somalia had any success in forming a civilized society, we smashed it. It's lunacy to expect Somalia as a whole to take any steps to restrain the worst impulses of its citizens, considering the war we foisted on them as a direct result of their most recent attempt to do so. If you spank your kid when he's good, and you spank your kid when he's bad, he's not going to bother trying to be good for long.
Mass slaughter? Define mass in this context please.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
Motorfirebox:
First off, how did you come up with that name? It is kind of interesting as I imagine is the story behind it.
I am interested in the immediate problem at hand, murderous Somali teenagers shooting people, kidnapping them and stealing their things. The immediate solution to that immediate problem is shooting said teenagers, sinking their boats and continuing to do so until they figure pirating isn't really so much fun. That puts an end to the violence (no more pirates, no more shooting pirates) and the whole cloth solutions can be started. As mentioned by Bill Moore, I think, you have to stop the shooting first before you can start effective development.
We haven't been doing that much, hardly at all. It is still big news when one or two pirates dies by the sword at sea. When it doesn't make the news at all because it has become routine, then the thing will stop; and then it won't make the news because it has stopped. If there is a pack of coyotes beleaguering your sheep, you don't just drop one, almost hit one then throw up your hands and wail that there is nothing you can do; you keep dropping them till they are all gone. (please don't come back with the coyotes from the next county will come over, these analogies can only take so much strain)
You mentioned starving fishermen. I don't know that much about the area in the area that used to be Somalia where all this started, but most of the starvation I've read about in the area that used to be Somalia was caused by armed groups of murderous Somali teenagers (they make another appearance) stealing food from other Somalis. My information is probably dated though. I would note that most of the pirates identified, to my knowledge, have been teens or men in their early 20s, about what you would expect in brigands. There don't seem to be many mature men who are heads of families righting the wrong by stealing the M.V. Itinerant and crew and ransoming it for $50 million.
There are lots of organizations who would be willing to go to the area that used to be Somalia to provide whatever help you care to name. I read they don't because it is too blinking dangerous. They operate in other completely confused areas of Africa, but not in the area that used to be Somalia. That may have something to do with the nature of the people who live in that area.
You mention building up the Somali naval forces. That is a grand idea. I think the first order of business would be to make a Somalia out of the area that used to be Somalia. That is a hard thing that nobody seems to have the stomach for, except the Ugandans. They are trying at least, and maybe the Burundians too, I think they are up there with the Ugandans. But in lieu of that, we should build up the Somaliland naval forces. There might be a chance there. Puntland, not so much.
I really don't care about what grave policy errors we made in the past concerning the area that used to be Somalia. As I said above, I am concerned about here and now. Therefore, I symbolically scourge the west, and the US most of all (naturally), for our past sins in the area that used to be Somalia. Now can we get to shooting some pirates and making the lives of innocent mariners a little easier?
Regarding this statement-"If you spank your kid when he's good, and you spank your kid when he's bad, he's not going to bother trying to be good for long. " You do what you want with your kid. But when you are driving down the distant interstate and some kid who lives next to it tries to carjack you, I concede your right to smite him a mighty blow regardless of what he says his circumstances are. (I hope I didn't strain that analogy beyond the breaking point.)
Here is a link to the story reporting the 4 Americans on board the pirated boat Quest were killed.
http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/22/fo...ec1_lnk3|45602
This may well be a tactical error that will bring strategic consequences. Americans are funny like that.
Killing enough Somalis to dissuade piracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
I came up with it around the time Hackers came out. That movie impressed on me the need to have a cool handle on the Internet, or else nobody would take me seriously. It's all in the name!Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
A few things. Most of the reports I've read have indicated that shooting people is generally a last resort. For the number of pirate attacks over the past few years, there have been a very low number of casualties. So I'm not sure it's all that fair to call these guys "murderous", as if they're just running around looking for people to kill. With the amount of money involved in these operations, I doubt the actually murderous teenagers are ever allowed to be pirates by their fellow ex-fishermen.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
I don't view piracy as the immediate problem. The piracy has been going on for something approaching three decades, now. The illegal fishing and dumping seems to be younger by ten to twenty years, and as I've said many times (and it's not just me--almost any serious examination of the issue you care to study says the same thing), seems to be responsible for the recent increase in incidents. The only thing that's been shown to effectively decrease incidents of piracy is the increase of law and order.
Killing pirates to reduce piracy is flat out a non-starter. This is Somalia. I don't think you're taking into account the amount of violence we would have to bring to the area to even get noticed, much less actually have an effect on the behavior of the population at large. I mean, read about what's going on there--this is a serious moneymaker for these people, and while a lot of the financing goes to international financiers, another large portion goes directly to the villages from which the pirates stage their operations. They're not going to stop because we kill a few of their shooters. They're not even going to stop because we kill a lot of their shooters--again, this is Somalia. It's not like they're going to run out.
Piracy in Somalia is a political issue. It's a social issue. Aside from the issue of who is to blame for the rise in piracy, any study of the area that consists of more than a quick glance at the actual incidents of piracy will reveal that there's more to the problem than dudes in need of being shot.
Which, as I said, makes shooting people the least likely course of action to effect change. In a room full of shouting people, you're not likely to make yourself heard by trying to outshout them. If we were to try to outshout (outshoot) Somalia, we would have to kill hundreds of thousands of people. Like, high hundreds. Anything less would just spawn more al Shabaabs. I won't even get into the effects that would have on our international relations--I'm just going to leave it there: killing hundreds of thousands of people to save a few million bucks.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
I have a minor quibble with that. Puntland is actually pretty swank by Somali standards. They have a functioning government, including an education system. And since it's where the majority of the pirate attacks come from anyway, that's where I'd start. Give the pirates something to do besides pirate and the attacks will drop.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
Our past sins are relevant because they affect our expectations for the region. A lot of the thinking about Somalia tends to run along the lines of "Somalia would be better off is Somalis stopped being so violent." That is demonstrably untrue--Somalis tried not being so violent, and they got invaded by Ethiopia for their troubles. This basically means that Somalis are never going to stop being so violent on their own in the forseeable future. Since we're the ones that dissuaded them from not being violent, it seems reasonable that the responsibility for giving Somalis reasons to stop being violent falls on us.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
Again, I'm not against taking action against pirates who are presently engaged in piracy. But we simply can't shoot enough pirates to stop the epidemic without a) spending more than the pirates take in ransom in the first place, and b) doing some truly horrific things.
Annnnnd there goes any possibility of us doing something besides shooting pirates. Nice one, Somalia.Quote:
Originally Posted by carl
Well I guess you just threw mass in for effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
I am a great believer in the persuasive power of one well targeted cruise missile. The brute force and ignorance approach may work but tends to leave a nasty taste in ones mouth... and some people have long memories.
First I would go after the money men in Europe (London and Holland I believe) then the ones in Kenya and Somalia itself. Then I would roll up the trigger men along the coast and/or out to sea.
I would suggest you give the CIA 6 months to wrap it all up otherwise you fire the director and ten of his top goons and hand the job over to the Marines.
Forgive my cutting in this late in the game, but I have to wonder just what your background and experience with Sub-Sahara is.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
Exactly how is this aging problem driven by politics in a country with literally no literacy rate and something like one percent of the population capable of using the internet (yet alone feed their families)?
I´ve also tried to find some credible source that clearly links illegal fishing and chemical dumping with our current piracy problems. There are certainly millions of bloggers with opinions, but some UN, USG or European think tank that concluded we are at the root of piracy for not restoring order to the Somali coast?
During the decade I served in 11 different countries I noticed one common denominator that fits herein: Piracy – whether at sea or on the freeway – is a means to an end and the easy way out. They have only just begun to kill and will certainly learn to perform far worse.
The Africans I know and taught know no boundaries. Killing and raping—beginning at home -- is inherent to the region. If we refuse to play by the rules in their sandbox, then we would be better off not spouting our Bravo Sierra, and staying out of the region.
I agree with this approach. Piracy has to be approached as what it is - an international criminal enterprise, not entirely dissimilar to drug cartels. The shooters are not in control on the high seas any more than the cartel gunmen in Juarez or gang members in Brooklyn - they are minimum-wage employees. Multimillion dollar ransoms are not being dropped off in some blasted-out house in Mogadishu - they are being transferred to Swiss accounts.Quote:
First I would go after the money men in Europe (London and Holland I believe) then the ones in Kenya and Somalia itself. Then I would roll up the trigger men along the coast and/or out to sea.
I didn't realize that South Africa had a currently functioning Marine Corps.Quote:
from JMA
I would suggest you give the CIA 6 months to wrap it all up otherwise you fire the director and ten of his top goons and hand the job over to the Marines.
;):)
Mike
If it were that easy it would be done by now. The idea we don't have the political will to unleash the CIA, in an era where Gitmo is still in full operation, is not one that passes the smell test. As for cruise missiles, these guys operate out of local villages. There's going to be significant collateral damage no matter how well-targeted the missile is. I don't think blowing up one of the more prosperous regions in Somalia is the key to reducing piracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by JMA
I claim no experience. I present evidence which you are free to discuss, disregard, or accept.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
I said that it's a political problem, not that it's a problem of internal Somali politics. It's a problem of international politics as they related to Somalia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
You mean aside from the Deputy Prime Minister of Somalia, speaking at a UN conference on Somali piracy? How about a statement from UN General Assembly President Ali Abdussalam Treki?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
Then perhaps we should help and encourage them to build a government which will dissuade and prevent such activity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan
I appreciate your good will in approaching this problem, but when you respond like this to a genuine Africa hand like Stan explaining the way things are over there, you can't be judged as anything but Manhattan cocktail party naive.Quote:
Originally Posted by motorfirebox
TIA. This is Africa. It isn't just a line in a movie, it really means something. Stan explained it. It really is.
All is moot now though. As Mr. Jones said, Americans will not like this.
One thing I am thoroughly puzzled by, apparently the pirates took a shot at an American destroyer with an RPG. Those guys are not only evil but terminally stupid.