Feral Jundi

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Maritime Security: IMO Guidance Calls For ISO Certification For Companies

Filed under: Maritime Security — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 1:49 AM

This is a good move. The ISO standard has been the goal of a number of groups and this is one step closer to giving legitimacy to this sector of the industry.

It is also cool to see the statistics mentioned in regards to pirate attacks. An increase in attacks, but a decrease in successful ones. Bravo to all of the security teams out there doing such a fantastic job in beating back these heathens. It really is impressive and armed guards on boats is definitely proving it’s worth.

But the statistics also show that pirates are not giving up and their industry continues to grow and expand. So they definitely have the greed and determination to keep going after their prey. Especially when they are expanding into new hunting grounds, and using mother ships and swarm type attacks. At this rate, there will not be any patch of ocean devoid of these thugs. –Matt

 

IMO Guidance Calls for Certified Private Maritime Security Companies
This is interim guidance from the International Maritime Organization’s Maritime Safety Committee that applies to privately contracted armed security personnel on vessels transiting off the east coast of Africa.
Jun 05, 2012
New interim guidance adopted by the International Maritime Organization’s Maritime Safety Committee calls for companies supplying armed security personnel to seek certification with national and international standards, once those are established. The IMO committee decided ISO is the organization best suited to develop an international standard.
The committee met May 16-25 in London, and IMO posted details of its guidance May 31. The guidance applies to vessels transiting what IMO called “the high risk area off the east coast of Africa.”
During their meeting, committee members discussed the 544 acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships that were reported to IMO in 2011, which represented an 11 percent increase from 489 reported the previous year. The areas most affected in both years were East Africa and the Far East, in particular the South China Sea, followed by the Indian Ocean, West Africa, South America, and the Caribbean. (East Africa alone was responsible for an increase from 172 incidents in 2010 to 223 in 2011.)

(more…)

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Maritime Security: Ships Slow Down To Save Fuel In Pirate Waters

The shipping companies have switched to relying on guards, rather than speed, for protection because a single day at lower speeds can save $50,000 in fuel at current prices – enough to pay the guards for the whole journey…..Peter Cook, director of the Security Association for the Maritime Industry, said estimates earlier this year had put the total fuel cost to shipping companies of running faster through the high-risk area in 2011 at $2.7bn.

There are a couple of points with this trend that needs to be mentioned. Armed security is giving these ship owners a way to save money. Instead of going as fast as they can and burning up expensive fuel, there are some opting to slow down and depend upon security to protect their vessels.

Which is great, but these shipping companies should be on notice that when you slow down the vessel, pirates will factor that in for their attacks. I mentioned before that pirates will eventually turn to attacking vessels that are armed, just because so many vessels are switching to armed security and the easy prey will soon be gone. The key factor here is that slow vessels will make it easier to board, or swarm. Which leads to my next point, and that is a discussion about the appropriate force size, weapons, and rules for the use of force to meet this demand.

I say this, because there are those in the industry that have different ideas about armed security or that everyone follows the same rule book for armed security. Which is fine, but pirates can pick up on these rules and various differences and exploit them.  For example, the policy for warning shots is something pirates can game.

They can find out at what distances warning shots occur, and then they can assemble attack formations that will account for that. I talked about Uboat tactics awhile back, and as long as pirates do not show weapons and are able to find that distance they can hang out at, they could potentially set up for a swarm attack. One example is that in the Bab el Mandeb Strait, up to 10 skiffs attempted to swarm a vessel in April.

A maritime security alert has been issued for the Bab el Mandeb Strait after 10 skiffs approached a Panama-flagged oil tanker on Sunday, April 29. Four skiffs initially approached, followed by a group of two, then four further skiffs. The suspected pirates abandoned the attack after an onboard security team fired flares and displayed weapons, according to GAC Protective Solutions. Such “swarming” has been previously reported in and around the Bab el Mandeb Strait.

Now imagine if this pirate force actually applied some concentrated firepower and coordination to this type of attack?  Will today’s standard guard force be able to counter that?  If we see more killer PAG’s like what Trident Group was up against, along with slower vessels and less unarmed vessels making transits, then yes, I think we will see an armed vessel taken down by force. I hope it doesn’t happen, and all we can do is to ensure all security forces have the tools and rules necessary to counter such things.

I have talked about weapons in the past, and having a couple of PKM’s or rifles chambered in 7.62 or higher would be good. Optics on weapons would be awesome so that security can observe and shoot if need be, or precisely put rounds where they need them. I am also a fan of the larger caliber weapons, like the M-2 HB .50 cal. A heavy caliber, belt fed machine gun can maintain good stand off distances, or can bring on a decent volume of fire as vessels make the charge. Especially for swarms.

M-240’s and PKM’s would be good for this as well. Having the ability to shoot an engine at distance would be excellent, and a large caliber sniper rifle would work for that. Something like a Barrett M-82 is what I am thinking of. And with the small size of guard forces on vessels, giving them weapons that would increase their lethality and range would be a force multiplier. In other words, an armed guard force must have weapons that out match the enemy’s weapons–in range, accuracy and lethality. That’s if you want your guard to force to have advantage? Your force already has the high ground, but don’t skimp on the weapons, and especially if you are only contracting a small force. (of course this is just my opinion, and everyone has their own ideas of what works out there)

Also, having a smart defensive plan and plenty of obstacles set up on the ship is key. It was mentioned on prior posts that concertina wire is selling like hotcakes out there.  Security should also apply Kaizen to their plan, and always look for advantage or ways to deal with all and any types of scenarios. Also, make sure you have sound communications, and other key support equipment to do the job. Especially night equipment, like NVG’s or thermals, or binoculars and spotting scopes for the day time.

Finally, and this is pointed towards ship owners. If slowing down to save money is something you want to do, then you have to know that you are giving pirates an advantage. As they take this advantage and attack vessels, you must also realize that armed security will be more important than ever before. They will engage in combat with pirates, and shipping companies should not be surprised or shocked if this happens. If anything, these companies should be highly supportive and thankful that men and women like this are willing to put themselves at risk to do this job. That is what you pay them to do, and if all other preventative measures fail then combat will occur.

By taking away speed, you are taking away a pretty effective measure and only increasing the odds of confrontation. So definitely make sure you have properly armed professional security if slowing down to save money is your goal.-Matt

 

Image: Nexus Consulting

 

Ships Slow Down to Save Fuel in Pirate Waters
Tuesday, 8 May 2012
By Robert Wright
Violent confrontations between Somali pirates and merchant ships’ armed guards could become more common as some shipping companies have reduced ship speeds through the highest-risk area to save on fuel, maritime experts have warned.
The shipping companies have switched to relying on guards, rather than speed, for protection because a single day at lower speeds can save $50,000 in fuel at current prices – enough to pay the guards for the whole journey.
The speed reductions contravene published advice that ships should use their maximum speed in the highest-risk areas. Pirates have never managed to board a vessel traveling at 18 knots or more and container ships and other faster vessels have traditionally crossed the high risk area up to 1,500 miles off Somalia’s coast at up to 24 knots.
Ron Widdows, chief executive of Germany’s Rickmers Holding, a major shipowner, said several maritime security companies had suggested his company employ their guards and slow ships down. Rickmers’ current security company opposed reducing speeds because pirates were more likely to attack slow ships, Mr Widdows added.

(more…)

Friday, April 13, 2012

Maritime Security: South Africa Ponders Armed Guards Aboard Merchant Ships

Anyone that has followed the legal show in South Africa towards private security should take note of this one. I was sickened by SA’s treatment of the brave contractors that went to Iraq or Afghanistan. Men were killed and wounded in these wars, and the professionalism and dedication they presented was awesome. They should have been celebrated for their service, and not demonized.

With that said, I think this latest news about SA re-evaluating the value of such men is good news. These veterans in SA would do a fantastic job of defending merchant ships. Not only that, but SA is strategically situated on the continent to take advantage of this market.

From providing floating armories to providing training, SA is in a position to certainly be of value to the industry. So I hope they do work out the legalities and allow armed guards on boats. We will see…

Another point I wanted make with this post, is the Enrica Lexie incident, where Italian Marines posted on this merchant vessel shot and killed some innocent fishermen thinking they were pirates. It has caused quite the stir between India and Italy.

What I wanted to point out was that this was a military detail, and not a private security force. With military details, a ship’s captain really has no say so on what they do–they are military, following the orders of their command. With PSC’s, a ship’s captain calls the shots, and if that PSC doesn’t like it, the ship owners contract the services of another PSC.  That is one of the key advantages with private versus public.

Also, Admiral Nirmal Verma conveniently removes this distinction in his commentary about this incident. That he forgot to mention that this was a ‘military detail’ that did this, and not a PSC.

With that said, eventually a PSC will have an accident. It is bound to happen and when it does, you will certainly see the opposition to private security on vessels use this as a reason why we should not have armed guards on boats. It is the typical knee-jerk reaction of such incidents, and we need to get prepared for it.

This is the floating iceberg of maritime security, and I think it would be prudent for groups like SAMI or BIMCO to have a discussion about how this can be best mitigated. I think all ship owners are watching the Enrica Lexie incident and thinking, what would happen if my guards shot and killed some innocent fishermen in a similar horrible mistake? What is the plan? Or do you just operate on ‘hope and prayers’ that it won’t happen…..?

Of course everyone is working on ensuring this does not happen. Standards and codes of conduct are being produced and signed by folks all over the world. But what is important to note is that we are still humans. We make mistakes and things can go wrong, despite all of the training and all of the rules/laws.  So there should be consideration by all parties as to how best to deal with this reality. Talk with the lawyers, talk with those who have suffered such consequences, and learn from these nightmare scenarios on how best to navigate them. Be prepared as they say….-Matt

 

SA ponders armed guards aboard merchant ships
By Dean Wingrin
Thursday, 12 April 2012
South Africa has been asked to grapple with the question of how to deal with armed guards aboard civilian ships at sea.
In her keynote address at the opening of the Indian Ocean Naval Symposium in Cape Town yesterday, Lindiwe Sisulu, Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, stated that a number of European countries had approached South Africa with the request that South Africa assist the armed guards that provide anti-piracy protection aboard merchant ships off the east coast of Africa.
“We would like to be advised by yourselves on the ethics and viability of this,” Sisulu asked the Symposium.
Speaking to reporters after her address, Sisulu said that the world was turning to providing onboard security to protect their vessels against piracy. As a result, South Africa was required to grapple with this issue and give it the go-ahead.
“But,” Sisulu continued, “there is a need for us in the South African context that we may be required to allow replenishment for those people who provide security onboard the ships. Now I do know that there is an ethical matter, on whether or not (civilian) ships (can) carry armed people.“

(more…)

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Maritime Security: The Insanity Of ‘Catch And Release’

A EU NAVFOR spokesman was unable to provide Sky News with a figure for how many suspected pirates had been returned to Somalia without charge.
“I don’t have the number for those returned to Somalia – a number of reasons but largely because it was not initially considered important to maintain the number,” the spokesman told Sky News. -Link to quote here.

This is the part of our global anti-piracy campaign that absolutely kills me. It’s as if these navies are sport fishermen, and they are releasing their catch so it can grow bigger, and spawn more fish, so they have more fish to ‘catch and release’ in the future.

Now of course we are dealing with the legal mechanisms, or lack there of, of each country that has laws that deal with piracy.  So when a navy captures a pirate or suspected pirate, those navies are operating under the guidelines of those laws. Because these countries have not implemented sound anti-piracy laws, we unfortunately see pirates captured and then release because of some legal mistake or loophole. Or, those that did the arresting of the pirates did not capture and detain properly, or properly document or obtain witnesses, etc.

So who are the worst offenders of ‘catch and release’?  That is a good question and I tried to do a little search for any comprehensive reports on this problem. Below, I have found a few recent articles on Canada and the UK, and their deficient legal mechanisms in place for prosecuting pirates. Here is a sample for the UK.

Fewer than one in every five suspects picked up around the Horn of Africa over the past four years have been prosecuted for piracy-related offences, the Ministry of Defence has admitted. The figures will fuel growing criticism of Britain’s involvement in the anti-piracy operation.
Official MoD figures obtained by The Independent on Sunday show the Royal Navy has boarded 34 vessels suspected of piracy in the Indian Ocean since volunteering to lead Operation Atalanta, the EU’s first naval mission, in 2008. However, on all but six occasions, the gangs rounded up were taken to the nearest beach and released – despite often being caught with equipment including guns and ladders. A list of boardings since November 2008 shows that the navy has detained a total of 279 likely pirates but allowed 229 of them to go free, some in groups of up to 17 at a time. Fifty more were sent on for prosecution in Kenya, the Seychelles or Italy.

Amazing. This is just insane, and this practice of catch and release must end.  Also, I wanted to mention that all the nations involved have had similar catch and release stories, so the UK or Canada are not the only ones. I have been documenting this for awhile now, and it is very frustrating.

I also wanted to mention that we are missing opportunities of detention by not allowing private security companies to detain and arrest these pirates. Every engagement could turn into an arrest and a removal of these criminals off of the high seas. By issuing Letters of Marque to PSC’s or the captain on these boats, nations could give them the same arresting powers that their navies currently have.

Within the terms of the LoM, you can define exactly how arrests are to be done and the specific rules for detention and transportation of prisoners. A country can also offer bounties for each pirate that was legally detained and prosecuted. We have GPS and video filming capability, and these can all be tools required under the terms of the LoM in these modern times.

As it stands now, security companies are executing the ultimate in extreme justice on the high seas. That would be actually killing pirates during the defense. So the question I have is why is killing pirates more appropriate than detaining them? If anything, a security company should have the option of capturing those pirates instead of just killing them. It would also take a load off of the larger navies who are tasked with anti-piracy.

So why capture them alive? Well, for intelligence purposes, a pirate that is alive and talking, is far better than a dead one. Also, by capturing them, we take them out of the game.  Of course killing them takes them out of the game permanently, but sometimes killing these pirates is not feasible within the course of current rules of engagement.

In one scenario, what if the pirates attacking the ship decided to stop their attack and just give up for whatever reason? Or during their attack, their engine fails and they get within killing range–so they raise their white flag right there. Does an armed guard execute these pirates who are trying to give up, or do they detain them? Or do we just let them go?  And also, if that pirate vessel is no longer sea worthy because armed guards made it so, and now pirates are sinking, is there any obligation at all to save and detain those pirates? These are all questions that could be answered with an effective Letter of Marque regime and bounty program, that makes capturing pirates something of interest to security companies on these vessels.

I mention bounty, because even with a LoM, security companies will not be entirely motivated to detain. An effective bounty or reimbursement program would be necessary to make up for the costs of such an offense industry. You must also incentivize the process in order to create a vibrant offense industry. A company would be risking life and limb to go that extra mile to capture a pirate crew, so companies must have some mechanism in place for compensation.

So those are my thoughts on the whole thing. The laws dealing with piracy need to catch up, and we also must look at legal mechanisms that will help to make the elimination of piracy more efficient and effective. –Matt

 

Navy frees four out of five suspected Somali pirates
Britain criticised for ‘particularly poor record’ in international crackdown on Indian Ocean piracy
Brian Brady
Sunday, 8 April 2012
Hundreds of suspected pirates arrested by the Royal Navy off the coast of East Africa have been immediately set free – to continue threatening merchant vessels in one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. Fewer than one in every five suspects picked up around the Horn of Africa over the past four years have been prosecuted for piracy-related offences, the Ministry of Defence has admitted. The figures will fuel growing criticism of Britain’s involvement in the anti-piracy operation.
Official MoD figures obtained by The Independent on Sunday show the Royal Navy has boarded 34 vessels suspected of piracy in the Indian Ocean since volunteering to lead Operation Atalanta, the EU’s first naval mission, in 2008. However, on all but six occasions, the gangs rounded up were taken to the nearest beach and released – despite often being caught with equipment including guns and ladders. A list of boardings since November 2008 shows that the navy has detained a total of 279 likely pirates but allowed 229 of them to go free, some in groups of up to 17 at a time. Fifty more were sent on for prosecution in Kenya, the Seychelles or Italy.
The Government has acknowledged the “catch and release” strategy is often an “unsatisfactory outcome”, although ministers also maintain it helps to disrupt pirate networks.

(more…)

Friday, April 6, 2012

Maritime Security: Caught On Film– Armed Private Security Repels Pirate Attack

I do not know who this company is and what their rules of engagement were, so if anyone has anything to add, feel free to do so in the comments. Warning shots were ordered first, but as the attackers kept coming, then the defenders had to open up and repel the attack. Also notice that ‘two’ skiffs attacked, and this seems to be the common tactic of pirates–or to work in pairs. Good on these security contractors and it looks like their defenses and planning worked. –Matt

Edit: 5/08/2012 It looks like the folks at Lloyd’s List were able to get some information about this video.  The ship was an Eagle Bulk Shipping vessel, and the security force was Trident Group. Here is a statement from the owner of Trident Group about this incident.

In an emailed statement to Lloyd’s List, Trident president Tom Rothrauff said: “This action came 72 hours following another attack by this exact same pirate action group against this very same vessel. Further, the same PAG had attacked a tanker in the week prior, so this was a killer PAG. Our team acted with poise, and used every rule for the use of force as prescribed by the US Coast Guard in PSA 3-09.

“The skiff was identified as carrying RPG’s and AK 47’s. The team was compelled to wait before they initiated warning shots until the master gave permission to the team to release repelling force. When the warning shots were fired, it just so happened that the skiff opened up on our team at the exact same time.”

Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress