That sums it up pretty well. But your current solution appears to favour a political solution rather than a military one. Is that where you currently stand on this issue?Originally Posted by Fuchs
Ok, but while it would be easy to enact such legislation by process I suggest that to get all the G20 to do so in say... the next ten years would be well neigh impossible.
Well it seems to me that if piracy is virtually impossible to prosecute the odd mysterious disappearance of the odd pirate skiff or mother-ship would be absolutely impossible to investigate and pin on someone.
That sums it up pretty well. But your current solution appears to favour a political solution rather than a military one. Is that where you currently stand on this issue?
Fuchs,
That's a good list of things we could have done (and could still do) but didn't. Such actions have consequences however, not all of them favorable.
Additionally, nations have certain responsibilities to their own citizens and ships that sail under national flags, and many have done so. Certainly the US has, but also South Korea, India and France. The US, for instances, recently nabbed the negotiator implicated in the murders of four American hostages, for example.
Also, ransom negiation doesn't appear to be illegal in Germany and I'm pretty sure it isn't in the US - or at least it isn't enforced.
Supporting "time-limited, scope limited military actions" for 20 years.
According to my insurance company it's illegal to insure an unlawful event. With that, I wrote asking about sailing directly to Somalia but have yet to receive a response
JMA,
Can one politically fix things without a military force? Not much history to bite on ! Seems to me, we (the military) end up fixing what the politicians dreamt about the night before (with their latest mistress).
Last edited by Stan; 04-17-2011 at 07:12 PM.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
Entropy:
Actions do have consequences, but inaction has consequences also. The consequences of inaction we are seeing and they may get more interesting now that the pirates think they can take on the Indians.
If some or all of the things Fuchs mentioned had been done years ago, the consequences would have been less for all, to include the pirates who may have been forced to work for a living years ago but now, unless they back down, may be forced to back their play.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
You may be right - then again you may not.
Any country with a half-decent Navy could have done (and still could do) most of the things of Fuch's list yet so far haven't. Why do you think that is?
Supporting "time-limited, scope limited military actions" for 20 years.
Pirates vs Indians? That didn't go so well for the Indians last time.
Yes, because as we all know, Somalia is the land of job opportunities....to include the pirates who may have been forced to work for a living years ago...
Early on in the pirate affair I pointed out that patrolling is stupid and historically pretty much never effective without incredible expenses. All pirates need land bases and going after them is the proven recipe since at least Pompey's stunning campaign against Mediterranean pirates.
There are many ways how force could be used to dissuade them from piracy. I could keep writing options and options for hours, I guess.
Political, economic, military, legal - the choice of likely effective options is stunning. To patrol the Indian Ocean is stupid, primitive, useless, ineffective, expensive, never-ending, distracting ... an option as if someone designed purposefully the worst imaginable option.
- -- ---
Now why is it still being done?
Navies aren't too enthusiastic about it, they know that they can do little more than embarrass themselves. So this time a military mission is not meant to raise a military service's standing.
I guess the reasons are
* "we need to do something"
* free riding of the shipping industry (which even dodges regulation and fees with flying the flag of Panama and other ludicrous seafaring nations, then calls for other governments with a navy as if the ships were registered there).
* bored media which hyped the affair up early on
* utterly, utterly incompetent politicians who have no clue about how to fight against piracy because their prime source about it was probably watching Jack Sparrow with their children.
* nobody is taking the affair serious enough to do something decisive about it
* the whole patrol thing became a political get-together that may actually have helped to improve relations (unlikely allies like the US-Iranians, Pakistanis-Indians)
* the step from the utterly pointless, primitive, stupid, useless, ineffective, expensive OEF patrolling of Somalia's coast (meant to give an OEF option that did not risk bloodshed to some countries who wanted to contribute to OEF, but not risk KIAs) to Atalanta was really, really small (the OEF ships were busier collecting intel on Somali pirates and smugglers than intercepting AQ)
Overall it's again a display of incompetence on several levels.
I'm sure that a Bismarck would either have officially declared the pirates utterly irrelevant or the problem would have been addressed properly.
Today's politicians simply have no guts to leave of bureaucracy's comfort zones. They have no competence in security policy either because they have either a security policy background of failure (US, UK, Portugal) or none to speak of for two generations (all else in NATO). Only exception is France, but France is iirc a country which has actually made use of special forces against pirates.
There are of course also countries like Russia who simply don't fool around and are reputed to simply kill pirates without telling anyone, with the effect that the pirates tend to avoid their ships.
Political correctness. The fact that most of our betters inside the beltway have spent their entire lives in plush, safe, secure surroundings, completely isolated from the hard realities of life; so completely isolated they doubt those realities even exist. Also an arrogant disregard for the importance of powerless, voiceless, peaceful people like those hundreds of anonymous crewmen waiting to be taken. Lastly, fear, they are afraid of the bully boys with the AKs and the attitudes, because they have never had to face one, that has always been done for them by people they look down upon.
That's why.
Motorfirebox:
Believe it or not, most people in the area that used to be Somalia, do work for a living, not highly remunerative work, but not international thuggery either. After a sufficient number of pirates are dispatched, and they will be eventually, those that are left will get a job. They kind they would have had before all the piracy started.
I expect you to retort with the barren fisheries argument stating that the poor yuts have to choose between brutalizing Filipino linehandlers and starvation. But when you do, tell me how much starvation there has been in the area that used to be Somalia in the last 10 or so years-that wasn't related to one group of thugs or another stealing the food that was there.
Last edited by carl; 04-18-2011 at 06:34 AM.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
Good stuff Carl, agree 100%, saved me a few replies.
If a general needs 30 years experience and a bunch of courses with command experience at every level before he gets to command a small operation like that of Libya or any future exercise against the Somali pirates what qualifications do you think the politicians should be required to have before they are allowed to start to complicate such matters?
OK, I agree the history of dealing with this particular piracy threat is bad. I also agree with what you suggest could have (and probably should have) been done.
But lets deal with the now.
I'm not sure the "sea-scouts" (waterborne equivalent of the boy-scouts) approach as outlined by the activities of the NATO naval force (in an earlier post) is what will achieve anything.
Remember the Russians and the Indians are part of this new international grouping BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) so maybe we can compare the actions of certainly India and Russia with wimp efforts for the NATO countries and the rest.
Must say though that the yanks at the sharp end when able to slip their leash do a fine job - Maersk Alabama for example. But then the clowns from the WH and State come along and screw it all up. From the Somalia Report:
These guys at Somalia Report make some recommendations for action at the end of their piece. You agree?Clearly the United States does not have a functional policy regarding piracy because it is lacking the basic knowledge to even begin to formulate a simple, land-based, long-term approach to ending piracy.
I don't know. I would like to believe that at least some contentious issues get resolved by the politicians before someone needs to be shot. I asked Carl what he thought the qualifications of politicians should be to qualify them to get involved in the complex world of foreign policy and the use of military power. What do you think?
JMA,
I had no idea you would link us to a State Dept. document
A very good article with some salient points that continue to escape our politicians. We've got plenty of intel and open source info on the ground, but yet ignore it. Heck, it's probably free info too
Every politician should start off with a tour in the military and finish off with a tour in an Embassy (in Africa). This will give him/her a taste of what happens when they are deciding our fate with the stroke of a pen.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
My comment wasn't just about the US. Again, there are any number of countries that could do most of the things on Fuch's list, yet they aren't except when their own ships or people are involved. Why do you think that is?
Supporting "time-limited, scope limited military actions" for 20 years.
Entropy:
Only a guess by me, but I think partly for the same reasons our inside the beltway mandarins don't, as I listed before. Partly it is because they don't have the wherewithal. Partly because they don't give a damn about anybody but there own people, the Russkis being a prime example. AHA! you say. Why shouldn't we be like them? A question like that should answer itself, but (here comes the naive idealist) I think the truly great nations, the nations that make a difference to world history in a mostly good way care about something beyond their immediate benefit because they know that seeing beyond their immediate benefit results in the benefit of everybody else which results in their long term benefit. Great Britain was a little like that. We are like that, or I hope we are like that. The other nations aren't like that. Could you imagine the Chinese Navy giving a hoot about anything that happens to ships that aren't Chinese? Motorfirebox's positions sort of reflect the attitude we have. I disagree with him, but he cares about the good of the people who live in the area that used to be Somalia, not because their welfare directly impacts us but because their betterment will increase the overall condition of mankind which will benefit us in the long run.
You and Motorfirebox may now criticize me harshly for sort of putting words in your mouths.
JMA:
About qualifications. I would prefer that somehow, someway the anointed ones get some experience that takes them away from their cloisters and exposes them to the real world of real people and real evil and real courage. There are any number of jobs that could do that, military as Stan suggests, police officer, prison guard, ambulance attendant, emergency room assistant, cab driver, any number of things. The idea wouldn't be to educate them in the academic sense, the idea would be to shape their experience and character by exposure to the real world.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
Yeah, that must be why there are continual relief efforts being sent to Somalia--because everyone has enough money to survive on. Perhaps "most" people do work in Somalia--a 51% employment rate would, after all, be "most". Everything I've read indicates an employment rate of less than half, though. If you have figures that indicate otherwise, please do share them.
How much starvation? Counting or not counting the massive amounts of foreign aid Somalia receives? It doesn't particularly matter whether the starvation is due to lack of potential for acquiring food or theft by corrupt contractors--no food and money is no food and money. If there were means of self-support to be had, foreign aid wouldn't need to be sent in the first place. Crime exacerbates the problem, but it's not the root cause.
Your position on this issue says otherwise.
Last edited by motorfirebox; 04-18-2011 at 02:49 PM.
Good morning Motorfirebox. How are you today?
When I lived in Kinshasa, we used to marvel at how the people made a living. I don't now if they even kept employment statistics, but if they had, I'm not sure most people would not have had formal employment. But they made a living somehow, and we were damned if we could figure out how. They weren't pirates, they may have thieved a bit, but they mostly didn't. I suspect things were the same in the area that used to be Somalia before the chance to slam around Indians for fun and profit came along.
I'll take your second paragraph as a concession that the basic survival needs can be met by those fine young yuts without needing to steal things from Iranian fishermen. The need for a big screen TV and the generator to run it though, I will in turn concede cannot be met without recourse to the adventurous life of a corsair.
Last edited by carl; 04-18-2011 at 04:05 PM.
"We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene
And the millions in aid we sent to Zaire for over two decades went right into Uncle Mo’s coffers; A very sad point of contention when we discuss humanitarian efforts and aid packages. The host country will just stymy the best of efforts unless there’s a take on their end. Our politicians have yet to factor such an equation into their swift pen strokes.
Tom had spent an inordinate amount of time working out how the FAZ survived when salaries were considered OK. Seems they worked out their own way of working and doing business. What I did notice was that once they found an easy route to making money (in spite of the fact they worked hard before) they showed little interest in returning to an honest day’s wages. I don’t see the pirates simply going back to fishing because we supply them with food aid and return them to bountiful fishing without poachers from the Far East.
If you want to blend in, take the bus
You talk about morality and doing the right thing, but your position can be summed up as "I don't care how Somalis live, or don't, so long as they leave us alone." That doesn't strike me as being particularly moral, especially in the sense of actively trying to make the world a better place. You (occasionally) talk the talk, but when it comes time to walk the walk you choose the option that promotes continued ignorance.
I'm not even going to address your interpretation of my second paragraph other than to express mounting frustration at your apparent inability or unwillingness to apprehend plain language.
India deploys naval warship near Somali coast
Published: Monday, Apr 18, 2011, 21:37 IST
India has deployed a naval warship close to the Somali coast as part of efforts to secure the release of seven of its nationals still held captive by the pirates despite taking ransom.
A Talwar Class stealth warship has been positioned near the coast for readiness for any military action in case it is required to rescue the hostages.
Link
Bookmarks