Feral Jundi

Monday, December 14, 2009

Maritime Security: Pirate Attacks Trigger Armed Guard Coverage

Filed under: Maritime Security — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 9:57 AM

   Hell, you know what that means when the insurance companies start jumping all over this?  They are reading the Tea Leaves and getting the picture that security contractors or ‘marine contractors’ on boats, armed with the necessary tools and skills to defeat these thugs, are the way to go.

   I also want to commend Zack Phillips for writing such a well researched little article.  There is a lot of meat in this thing, and I highly recommend checking out some of the maritime security companies he mentioned.  You might be able to get a job with them, by doing a little Google Fu. –Matt

—————————————————————–

Pirate attacks trigger armed guard coverage

Programs protect shipowners against increased liability risk

Dec. 13, 2009

Zack Phillips

Insurers and brokers have begun to offer products that cover or facilitate the use of armed security guards onboard ships to defend against piracy.

But despite the persistence of pirate attacks, the shipping industry remains largely reluctant to put firearms on vessels, observers say.

Shipowners and their underwriters typically have been wary of arming merchant ships, due to a host of potential legal, logistical and safety problems. But in recent months, as pirates off the coast of Somalia have hijacked several ships and attacked scores of others, some insurance products have emerged that would cover the use of armed security personnel to ward off pirates.

“The attitude has changed but they never had this type of scenario before,” said Lars Gustafson, a New York-based senior vp at Marsh Inc.

Despite an international flotilla of naval ships shepherding merchant ships through safe-travel corridors, pirates off the coast of Somalia have hijacked 31 ships in 2009 and attacked 172, compared with 42 hijackings and 111 attacks in 2008, according to figures from the International Maritime Bureau’s Piracy Reporting Center in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Senior officers in the U.S. and British navies separately have encouraged ship owners to consider the use of armed security personnel on board. The Danish shipping giant Clipper Group announced in November it was carrying up to six Russian marines aboard some of its ships transiting the Gulf of Aden near Somalia.

(more…)

Logistics: For U.S. Troops in Afghanistan, Supplies Are Another Battle

Filed under: Afghanistan,Logistics — Tags: , , , , , , — Matt @ 9:03 AM

“At this phase, Afghanistan is a logistics war as much as any other kind of war,” said Mr. Carter, whose formal title is under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, in a recent interview. 

*****

   Oh yeah, logistics, and not one mention of the contractors that will be responsible for getting those things into Afghanistan.  Maybe August could write a story about that sometime, because I know we are going to be in the thick of it all. I will keep my eye out, but at least this story gave a few indicators of the concerns with logistics. –Matt

—————————————————————–

For U.S. Troops in Afghanistan, Supplies Are Another Battle

December 14, 2009

By August Cole

The White House has settled on sending additional troops to Afghanistan, and now the Pentagon must grapple with another thorny problem: how to support them once they get there.

For Ashton Carter, the top Pentagon official in charge of weapons purchases, that has meant focusing on the concrete — literally. Basic materials for building bases are in short supply or nonexistent in Afghanistan, so U.S. officials must search for staples like concrete next door in Pakistan.

Another priority: Getting thousands of blast-resistant trucks from Oshkosh Corp.’s factory in Oshkosh, Wis., to U.S. forces in the Afghan hinterlands.

“At this phase, Afghanistan is a logistics war as much as any other kind of war,” said Mr. Carter, whose formal title is under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, in a recent interview.

Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan has no modern infrastructure. Critical supplies such as fuel must be imported. The country is landlocked and has just three major overland routes. Enormous distances separate bases and outposts. High mountains and valleys, as well as extreme weather, make air travel difficult.

(more…)

Strategy: The Five Elements of the Letter of Marque and Reprisal

Filed under: Legal News,Strategy — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 8:03 AM

   This is unique.  This is the first website that I have found, that actually listed various LoMs from all over the world and from different time periods, and has reduced the LoM to these five basic elements.  So if anyone is interested, follow the link below, and you can check out what the various countries set up. It lists France, Holland, Britain, America, and Spain as just a few.

   Now if I could get a hold of the LoM that we issued to the Airship Resolute during World War Two, then that would be really cool. I imagine it is in some congressional archives deal, and maybe that will be a future post.

   The Resolute was a Goodyear ship as well, and did advertisements after the war.  If there are any documentarians out there, this would be a very unique subject to work on and present.  There is nothing out there that talks about it, to include any serious wikipedia stuff, and I think it would be a fascinating subject if tied into a modern day usage of the LoM. –Matt

——————————————————————

The Five Elements of the Letter of Marque and Reprisal

Letters of marque and reprisal are commissions or warrants issued to someone to commit what would otherwise be acts of piracy. They will normally contain the following first three elements, unless they imply or refer to a declaration of war to define the enemies, and may optionally contain the remainder:

1. Names person, authorizes him to pass beyond borders with forces under his command.

2. Specifies nationality of targets for action.

3. Authorizes seizure or destruction of assets or personnel of target nationality.

4. Describes offense for which commission is issued as reprisal.

5. Restriction on time, manner, place, or amount of reprisal.

*****

American Letter of Marque, 1812

The Letter below is an example of an American letter of marque of an actual privateering commission issued by the government of the United States to the schooner Patapsco during the War of 1812.

JAMES MADISON, President of the United States of America.

TO ALL WHO SHALL THESE PRESENTS, GREETING:BE IT KNOWN, That in pursuance of an Act of Congress passed on the eighteenth day of June one thousand eight hundred and twelve, I have commissioned, and by these presents do commission, the private armed Schooner called the Patapsco of the burthen of 159 tons, or thereabouts, owned by Andrew Clopper, Levi Hollingsworth, Amos A. Williams and Henry Fulford of the City of Baltimore mounting 6 carriage guns, and navigated by 40 men, hereby authorizing James M. Mortimer Captain,

(more…)

Legal News: Omnibus Bill FY 2010–Embassy and Worldwide Security Protection Stuff

Filed under: Afghanistan,Government Work,Iraq,Legal News — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 12:56 AM

     I found this over at Diplopundit, which is a great blog that tracks this stuff.  They basically broke down the bill as to the budget amounts and any new amendments.  I especially clued into the latest budgetary figures, increases in new security positions, and the latest ‘best value’ contracting mechanism that State has. They even mention the Kabul Fiasco specifically, as a reason for the amendment.  Check it out. –Matt

——————————————————————-

From Diplopundit:

Worldwide Security Protection

The conference agreement provides $1,586,214,000 for Worldwide Security Protection, which is $8,787,000 above the House and $8,786,000 below the Senate. The conferees note that $13,375,000 requested for fiscal year 2010 was included in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-32), bringing the total available for Worldwide Security Protection in fiscal year 2010 to $1,599,589,000. Within the amount provided, $221,926,000, and a projected 200 security positions, are to strengthen the Department’s capacity to respond to the growing security challenges at posts around the world, including the requested positions for the second year of the Visa and Passport Security Plan.

Embassy Security Constructions and Maintenance

The conference agreement provides $1,724,150,000 for Embassy Security, Construction, and Maintenance, which is the same as the House and Senate, of which $847,300,000 is for priority worldwide security upgrades, acquisition, and construction and $876,850,000 is for other operations, maintenance and construction.

The following provisions are new, modified from the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (Public Law 111-8), or further clarified in this joint statement.

Sec. 7006. Local Guard Contracts.

The conference agreement includes a new provision which allows the Secretary of State flexibility to award local guard contracts on the basis of either lowest price that is technically acceptable or the best value cost-technical tradeoff (as defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation part 15.101) when awarding such contracts in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.

Current law requires that all local guard contracts must be awarded on the basis of the lowest price that is technically acceptable, and if other factors had been considered, the problems reported earlier this year involving the local guard contract in Kabul, Afghanistan may have been prevented. The conferees understand that providing the Secretary with authority to make awards through the best value approach can enhance the guard force’s effectiveness and justify the additional cost, particularly in countries with dangerous or hostile environments.

Check out Diplopundit here.

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Leadership: Disciplinary Policy, Handy Dandies and the Three Strikes Principle

Filed under: Kaizen,Leadership — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Matt @ 12:27 PM

    This article is about a better disciplinary policy for companies. The reason I am bringing this up, is because most of these multi-million dollar defense companies that put security contractors out in these war zones, have absolutely terrible disciplinary policies.  Their leaders out in the field have their hands tied, and often are unable to be effective in keeping control of their troops and maintaining order on the contract. It seems that most contracts have no middle ground when it comes to discipline.  You either do well, or you are fired and sent home, and then replaced by someone else. Or they don’t do anything at all about poor performing contractors. Pffft.  I believe my system is more economical, more effective for maintaining control, and provides a better way of doing business.

     So this is what I think the companies should set up.  It is purely my opinion and based on my experiences as a contractor, former Marine, and former Smokejumper.  It is also based on my management experience in all three occupations.

(more…)

« Newer Posts — Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress