Feral Jundi

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Maritime Security: The JLT ‘Private Navy’ Is Close To Kick-Off

      Woollerson would also like to see it involved in trying to remove the causes of Somali piracy through land-based initiatives.

     “I see the CEP as a self-destructing company. Maybe in many years’ time we will no longer be needed and could donate the tonnage to a Somali coastguard,” he said.

     This is a very interesting quote, and actually the entire article below is filled with some great stuff. Bravo to the author for getting the scoop and putting it out there for all to read. Here are my older posts with comments that first talked about this venture.

     Now for my take on the whole thing.  In order for this Convoy Escort Programme (CEP) to be a ‘self-destructing company’, it must take part in destroying their ‘Raison d’être’ –the pirates.  Escorting ships does not alone create this kind of market mechanism. Especially if they only plan on capturing 27% of the merchant traffic going through the GoA, and allowing the pirates to feast on the other 73% of the merchant traffic. If anything the consequence, intended or unintended, will be a higher concentration of armed pirates attacking undefended vessels.

    The other angle on this is that merchants and insurance companies will see how this works, and they too will fire up a similar business model.  That other 73% of the merchant market might shrink pretty fast with a higher concentration of pirates coming down on them, and an increase of insurance backed protective services available to them at a decent price.

    But this is where the quote up top really grabs me, and that is the land based initiatives of this CEP team.  Could there be something going on here, like JLT taking a hint from what is going on with Saracen International and their proposed private militia? I bet JLT wouldn’t mind attracting some of that funding coming from this middle eastern mystery donor either.

    Finally, there is the quote about a reputable flag state sponsoring these CEP vessels, and the concept of a government and military granting them ‘legitimacy’. That sounds like all the makings for a Letter of Marque or some kind of similar license to do what they are going to do. We will soon find out in the coming months exactly what kind of arrangement we have here. –Matt

‘Private Navy’ Is Close To Kick-Off

December 10, 2010

An insurance broker’s plan to create a “private navy” to combat Somali piracy is close to being launched.

Shipowners could be asked to back the project as early as late January or February with private military-escort vessels sailing alongside merchant ships by mid-2011.

A reputable flag state prepared to register the 18 patrol boats has been lined up, shipowner support is being canvassed and preparations made to secure funding for the vessels and crew.

Sean Woollerson of the Jardine Lloyd Thompson (JLT) insurance-broking group says there are still issues to overcome but the key task of securing government and military support to give the project “legitimacy” is almost there.

The venture, now branded as the Convoy Escort Programme (CEP), estimates it needs only £15m ($23.5m) to buy secondhand vessels suitable for use as patrol boats and the rest of the infrastructure.

Greek salvage entrepreneur George Tsavliris is already seeking support from fellow shipowners and Bimco has indicated a willingness to help facilitate the project.

(more…)

Friday, November 12, 2010

Maritime Security: Somali Piracy Getting Worse Despite The Efforts Of Worldwide Navies

     Man, this is not a very good report card about the effectiveness of the current strategy. It also shows to me that the pirates are getting better at what they are doing, and they are also increasing their reach.

     Not to mention the scalability of the whole thing. If an operation costs $ 30,000, and a pirate has fetched millions of dollars in ransom in the past, then with each ransom, they can dramatically scale up the amount of operations. This increases the odds of success. The numbers below speak for themselves.

     Now on to the solutions. There are two things that have to happen that the world community just does not have the will to do, or the spine to promote, in order to stop this. They have to effectively deal with the problems in Somalia on land, and shipping must have a viable means to protect itself on the high seas. In my book, ‘viable means’ is defined as armed security on every boat.

     Along with those armed security professionals, must also come the legal mechanism necessary to allow this force to do what it needs to do.  Here on the blog I continue to promote how countries could provide such a legal mechanism through the granting of the Letter of Marque (LoM). I have also posted numerous legal treatments on the subject here on the blog with the hopes that folks will start thinking about the concept.

     The other area of interest for me is that as pirates become more asset rich, the possibilities of seizing their assets on the high seas or somehow taking what they stole, increases. With a LoM system right now, there is nothing of value that the pirates have because they have such low operating costs.  So the LoM would only serve as a legal framework for PSC’s to protect vessels.

     But as ship owners continue to pay ransoms and pirates begin to upgrade to more valuable ships and hardware, I could see a day where a privateer might benefit from the seizure of a prize like this.

     A privateer might also be able to benefit by retrieving that ransom money somehow. Either on the high seas right after the exchange, or if they were able to get on land and take it from the pirate. My thoughts on the matter is that if there is any mechanism at all for allowing companies to legally take from the pirates, then now you would have a competitive strategy to counter the current piracy business model. Pirates profit by taking from the weak, and privateers would profit by taking from the pirates.

     I estimate that a system such as this would eradicate piracy pretty effectively. Just think of the size and scope of such a thing? The entire world and all of it’s private naval industries, armed with licenses to take from pirates, versus a few hundred Somali pirates off the coast of Africa or where ever they want to exist. Out of that process we would see some really innovative and effective pirate hunters, and that is the kind of thing that would put the fear of god into these thugs. I would imagine that some of the best pirate hunters, would be former Somali pirates themselves. Or who knows who would rise to the top in such an environment?

     And if a value was assigned to Somali pirates in the form of bounties, then that would really create the profit motive needed to fuel such an anti-pirate industry. Call it a clash of industries or privateers versus pirates. And get this, today’s shipping companies are creating an asset rich pirate by continuing to pay these ransoms. Until then though, an LoM would probably be most effective as a legal mechanism used to help defend private shipping. –Matt

Somalia Pirates’ Success Rate Rises, Stunting East Africa Economies

By Bill Varner

Nov 2, 2010

The international naval presence off the coast of Somalia is failing to reduce the success rate of pirates whose attacks on commercial ships are stunting the economies of East Africa, the United Nations said.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon reported to the Security Council that 37 of 164 attacks on ships operating off the coast of Somalia succeeded in the first nine months of this year. That 22.6 percent rate of successful hijackings compares with 17.1 percent, of 193 attempts, for the same period in 2009.

“Piracy in the region has had an immense impact on the economies of East Africa and also the wider world,” Ban said in his report. “International trade routes are threatened and goods in the region as well as Somalia are becoming more expensive. This is made worst by the bleak state of the global economy.”

The pirates concentrate on the Gulf of Aden, a chokepoint leading to the Suez Canal that is used by 30,000 ships a year carrying about one-tenth of world trade. Attacks have spread to the Indian Ocean, as much as 1,000 miles from shore.

The rate of successful hijackings increased even with the presence of warships from the European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization and 25 other nations including the U.S., China, India, Iran and Japan. Commercial ships are using defensive measures such as netting, wire, electric fences and fire hoses to prevent boarding.

More Sophisticated Weapons

Ban said the pirates have countered with more sophisticated weaponry and use of “action groups” consisting of a large command boat towing attack skiffs.

“I am afraid that the problem will not only be with us for a long time to come, but also has the potential to become worse unless both Somalis and the international community address its root causes,” Ban said. “There is an urgent need to combine vital sea-based and judicial counter-piracy initiatives.”

(more…)

Monday, November 8, 2010

Publications: Corsairs In The Crosshairs–A Strategic Plan To Eliminate Modern Day Piracy, By Alexandra Schwartz

Corsairs in the Crosshairs: A Strategic Plan To Eliminate Modern Day Piracy, By Alexandra Schwartz

Letter Of Marque: A Review Of Corsairs In the Crosshairs

     This note proposes that the solution to the rapidly escalating problem of piracy is for the U.S. government to issue the license equivalent of historical letters of marque to private actors, thereby granting them increased legal immunity and political approval to use force to protect private vessels against piracy.  Letters of marque were legal commissions granted by Congress to private citizens granting them cover to engage enemies of the country.  At the same time, it is important for the U.S. to regulate the forces that they sanction and this note will discuss the current state of such regulation. The legal background of authority to address pirates, emanating from customary, international, and municipal law demonstrates that, despite some potential hurdles, this proposed solution is a legally valid and efficient option. -Alexandra Schwartz from Corsairs in the Crosshairs

     David Isenberg was the one that found this gem of a paper and a big hat tip to him. As you can see in the post above, I have also downloaded a copy into Scribd so you can read the whole thing. This post will be dedicated to some of the highlights of the paper that jumped out at me.

    Specifically, I really liked the various legal mechanisms that Alexandra dug up and I learned some new stuff. If you are interested in the legal side of privatized anti-piracy operations, then this paper is for you.

     There are a few areas that I wanted to put up for the reader to check out and note. One is the 1819 US Law titled ‘Resistance of Pirates by Merchant Vessels’.  Like with the Letter of Marque, this little guy exists in the books as a vigorous means of defense that even involves capture if need be. Here it is:

     The commander and crew of any merchant vessel of the United States, owned wholly, or in part, by a citizen thereof, may oppose and defend against any aggression, search, restraint, depredation, or seizure, which shall be attempted upon such vessel, or upon any other vessel so owned, by the commander or crew of any armed vessel whatsoever, not being a public armed vessel of some nation in amity with the United States, and may subdue and capture the same; and may also retake any vessel so owned which may have been captured by the commander or crew of any such armed vessel, and send the same into any port of the United States. -33 U.S.C. § 383 (2000)

     The next area was in regards to the Declaration of Paris. Alexandra only confirms exactly what I have been repeating here. That the US did not sign the DoP, and that we even signed laws at that time that further enforced our right as a nation to issue LoM’s. She mentioned this law, and I had never heard of it before. Check it out:

     Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That in all domestic and foreign wars the President of the United States is authorized to issue to private armed vessels of the United States, commissions, or letters of marque and general reprisal in such forms as he shall think proper, and under the seal of the United States, and make all needful rules and regulations for the government and conduct thereof, and for the adjudication That the authority conferred by this act shall cease and terminatethree years from the passage of this act. -An Act concerning Letters of Marque Prizes, and Prize Goods, ch. LXXXV, 12 Stat. 758 (1863) (This act was passed on Mar. 3, 1863, and provided that the authority it conferred would “cease and terminate” three years after its passage). 

     Alexandra also covers some of the particulars of a modern version of a Letter of Marque, and draws from a certain publication written by Robert P. DeWitte called ‘Let Privateers Marque Terrorism: A Proposal for a Reawakening’. So I will have to further research what he has to offer and get that up on blog as well. Check it out and let me know what you think. –Matt

Link to Scribd Publication here.

Edit: 11/09/2010- I wanted to add this one little piece for everyone to check out as well. The author here claimed the Spain and Britain both did not abide by the Declaration of Paris. I had never heard of Britain’s use of Prize Courts and paying prize money to folks to attack the enemy during WW 2. I am definitely trying to find out more about this.

Quote from Corsairs in the Crosshairs:

Moreover, even if one were to argue that the Declaration of Paris has become customary law, it is important to observe that many countries that signed it have continued the practice of issuing letters of marque in the modern era.

See Jacob W.F. Sundberg, Piracy: Air and Sea, 20 DEPAUL L. REV. 337, 353 (1971) (“Even after Spain, in 1908, had acceded to the Declaration of Paris of 1856 which outlawed privateering in naval war between parties to the treaty, the opinion was advanced that it is perfectly possible under general international law to issue letters of marque.”). The British navy utilized prize money to reward those who fought for them in World War II, with the British Prize Court in London awarding about $40 million dollars. Id. at 354. 

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Maritime Security: Anti-piracy Measures For Sale In Hamburg, Germany

     A recent survey of 110 German shipping companies by PWC (formerly PriceWaterhouse Coopers) found that 12 used private security agencies in some capacity. Ruetten believes this is not nearly enough, and that too many companies rely on improvised defense measures like strapping mannequins to strategic positions on deck to make a ship look like it is being guarded. 

     I found this article over at Deutsche Welle. It gave a good run down of the German maritime security market and how they view PSC’s in the Gulf of Aden. The quote up top was really interesting, but as per usual, they have some folks here giving some very bad advice about the realities of the high seas.

    Max Johns, spokesman for the Association of German Ship-owners is wrong on one of his points he brought up as well. The private security team he is referring to, was not armed and had no means of protecting themselves or the boat other than with the pathetic less than lethal crap they had. So his point that PSC’s are a bad idea because they are not dependable is wrong.

     Unarmed PSC’s are a bad idea, and I am sure if these folks had a means to defend themselves and the crew, the outcome would have been far different. It is dorks like this spokesman who continue to promote this myth that less than lethal is an appropriate defense against pirates armed with RPG’s, PKM’s and AK 47’s. It is this same myth that creates this mindset that companies should just roll the dice, or pay the ransom if their vessel is taken. Meanwhile, every ransom paid just increases the size of the piracy problem. It is a simple equation–paying ransoms fuels piracy.

     And those PSC companies that continue to tell shipping companies that being unarmed in those waters is a good idea, are equally to blame. It’s as if you are selling a company on the idea that you can magically protect them without using lethal force.  Your strategies might work for some cases, but they will not cover the instances where a pirate force actually understands how to defeat your less than lethal measures (like using binoculars to tell if you have mannequins on the deck) and/or evasive maneuvers (ransom money allows investments in faster boats).

     Just wait until pirates start coming aboard with cutting torches or shaped charges to open the doors of safe rooms or bridges/engineer rooms? Or when they start contracting captains and crews that know how to command these ships? The pirate is not dumb and they are learning and evolving as their industry is fueled by the profits gained by ransoms.

     The point is, losing control of your ship is ‘losing control of your ship’. Having armed and competent security on a ship will at least give the crew and captain a fighting chance. Having a strong defense is also a crucial element in taking care of your people, which I would certainly hope a captain or the owner of a company would actually care about?

    As for the German company IBS mentioned, I haven’t a clue as to who they are or what they are all about. If any of my German readers have anything to add, feel free to comment below. –Matt

Anti-piracy measures for sale in Hamburg

By Ben Knight

October 25, 2010

The hijacking of two ships over the weekend highlights the difficulties Western navies face combating piracy off the coast of Somalia. Many shipping lines are turning to private security firms for protection.

When it comes to global shipping, there is no avoiding the Gulf of Aden, which leads between the failed state of Somalia and Yemen – a nation security analysts describe as at-risk. These waters carry a significant share of the world’s wealth, including 11 percent of the world’s seaborne oil.

The 25,000 cargo ships that pass through the Gulf of Aden every year are tempting targets for heavily armed groups in Somalia, who claim overfishing by foreign vessels has robbed them of their livelihoods.

Earlier this year the International Maritime Bureau warned that attacks on merchant shipping are on the rise. European defense officials say Somali pirates are currently holding 20 ships and more than 400 crew for ransom off the Horn of Africa.

(more…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress