Feral Jundi

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Industry Talk: IPOA 2008 ‘Engaging AFRICOM’ Summit

Filed under: Africa,Industry Talk — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 4:45 PM

     Boy, this would be a cool little deal to sit in on, if you could afford it.  There will be a ton of guest speakers that would be extremely interesting to hear from, or even talk to if you get a chance.  A lot of the big name security companies will have representatives there, as well as some of the top notch military thinkers (like John Nagl).  As you can see, Africa is an important topic for the industry and it will be interesting to hear some of the reportage coming out of this summit. –Head Jundi

 

About the Summit 

The International Peace Operations Association Annual Summit is the premiere event of the private peace and stability operations industry.

WHO DOES ATTEND AND WHO SHOULD ATTEND?

    * Logistics Firms

    * Government

    * Private Security Firms

    * NGOs

    * Humanitarian Development Firms

    * International Organizations

    * Security Sector Reform Firms

    * Military

    * UXO Firms

    * Academics

    * Product Manufacturers and Suppliers

    * Media  

WHERE WILL THE SUMMIT BE HELD?

The Summit will be held in Washington, D.C., home to some of the world’s largest clients in the global peace and stability operations industry — and also Headquarters of IPOA. The venue for the Summit will be The Liaison Hotel on Capitol Hill, 415 New Jersey Avenue NW, near the U.S. Capitol.

(more…)

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Industry Talk: Piracy-Hart Security Joins Forces with Swinglehurst Insurance

Filed under: Industry Talk — Tags: , , , , — Matt @ 1:48 PM

   I thought that this was cool, and certainly a positive trend in the industry.  When the insurance companies think it is a good idea to offer security professionals to ship owners, that want reduced cost insurance plan, then that means it must make sense financially for the insurance company.  That these companies are probably getting sick of paying out large sums of money to professional kidnap and ransom crews that operate in such places like the Gulf of Aden.  This concept is nothing new to the industry, what I do like about the latest focus on piracy, is the potential of more work for security contractors.

    Now on the security side of things, hopefully Hart is providing everything the guys in the field need in order to protect these ships.  There are so many rules and laws that completely hamstring some of these maritime operations, or the companies themselves shortchange the security forces tasked with protecting the client and their ship because of cost.  I am not saying Hart would do such a thing, but these are the issues that come to mind once we start talking about security on the high seas.  

     These pirate crews, thanks to the exorbitant bounties they have been getting lately, are able to invest in some heavy duty firepower and boats.  Will security operations be able to deal with this effectively?  Who knows, but I do know that this issue should be looked at seriously by those involved with the operation.  With a ship, getting off the ‘X’ or kill zone is a lot tougher than with convoy operations on a road.  You cannot run away and in the high seas, the ‘bigger stick’ does make all the difference. 

    It’s the same thing for convoy operations in Iraq or Afghanistan and how the companies carry out those contracts. As a security specialist (speaking for myself), I want all the tools (weapons, armor, sound vehicles, etc.) necessary to do the job of protecting the client and team. I also want sound leadership that know their stuff, has the courage to do what is right, and takes care of their people.  And taking care of your people means someone that is not afraid to train the team to a level of extreme unit cohesion/intelligence, and fighting for the team when they have issues or need certain tools to do the job.  The pay is important, but not the most important issue out in the field.  

     I want to be with a team that will give me the highest odds of survival and mission accomplishment so I can come home to spend that money I earned.  And you know what the say– ‘Dead clients don’t pay’, so it pays to focus on taking care of your security force.  I say God bless the company that understands this concept and makes it a priority, and God damn the company that puts more of a priority on cost and completely ignores these concepts of sound leadership and taking care of their people. –Head Jundi 

6 October 2008

Protected Gulf of Aden Voyages

 

Hart Security is pleased to announce that it has joined forces with Swinglehurst Limited in a move that sees the benefits of security and insurance combined to offer the best all round protection on voyages in the Gulf of Aden. 

Swinglehurst now offers Shipowners, either directly or via their brokers, War Risk Cover including the risks of Piracy, for voyages within the Gulf of Aden where vessels are protected by Hart personnel.  The comfort afforded by the involvement of Hart will enable extremely attractive insurance rates to be offered.  

Key Elements of the product

•        Cover placed 100% at Lloyd’s

•        Vessels protected by Hart Security Team during voyages

•        Piracy included within War coverage

•        Attractive insurance terms aligned with preferential market rates from Hart

•        Hull values up to USD 75,000,000

•        War P & I up to USD 75,000,000

•        Detention cover to protect Loss of Earnings if required

•        No deductible for Physical Damage Cover

Notice of voyages should be given 14 days in advance so that arrangements for protection can be made.

Hart is a recognised market leader in the provision of maritime security solutions to the transportation and energy sectors. Working closely with governments, regulatory bodies and industry, Hart is able to provide practical security solutions to meet clients’ requirements.

Hart’s Maritime Department has extensive experience from both the military and commercial sectors in providing waterborne security.  The company provides consultancy services, personnel and vessels for Anchorage and Oilfield Waterborne Security Support, Exclusion Zone Enforcement, Sub-Surface Detection/Deterrence and Anti-piracy Support Services for Governments and industry.  

Their experience in providing Waterborne Security Services worldwide include: Anti-piracy Services in the Gulf of Aden and Malacca Straits, EEZ Fisheries Protection Operations along the coast of East Africa and Exclusion Zone Enforcement and Maritime Counter Terrorism training courses for the Yemen Ministry of Defence.

The Swinglehurst Group was founded in 1999 and is a leading independent insurance broker in the London market.  Based in the City of London Swinglehurst also has representative offices in Brazil (Rio de Janeiro); Chile (Santiago); China (Shanghai); Colombia (Bogotá); Uruguay (Montevideo); USA (Miami).  They provide brokerage and claims services in the following classes of insurance business:  Marine, Non-Marine, Renewable Energy, Aquaculture, Life (Accident and Health), Motor, Travel Insurance and Warranty.   

 

For Insurance enquires please contact:

Paul Agate (paul.agate@swinglehurst.co.uk) Mobile: +44 7970 719837 or

Mike Maloney (mike.maloney@swinglehurst.co.uk) Mobile: +44 7967 561049

www.swinglehurst.co.uk 

 

For Hart Waterborne Security Services please contact:

Carina Dixon (cdixon@hartsecurity.com) Telephone: +44 20 7751 0771

www.hartsecurity.com

Friday, October 10, 2008

Industry Talk: Piracy, Somalia, and Using Private Security

Filed under: Industry Talk,Somalia — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 5:23 PM

    So this is where we are at with anti-piracy off the coast of Africa.  The UN has given the plea, as has most organizations out there, that we need to do something about the rampant piracy going on in the Gulf of Aden.  But where it all goes is up in the air.  We need action, and not just talk, if the issue of piracy is to be dealt with properly.  This latest resolution is nice, but if none of the nations out there are willing to contribute to this effort with naval support or they do not have the resources, then I really don’t see how the job could be done.  Unless….. we actually re-visit the idea of private naval companies and using contract security companies to protect these ships.  

     I disagree with those that say a private force could not properly protect these ships.  My best analogy for this is convoy security in places like Iraq or Afghanistan.  If set up correctly with Rules for the Use of Force, and with good UN oversight, then security contractors could do an excellent job.  But yet again, that would take the UN to re-evaluate it’s view on this type of activity. 

    Another idea is to have private naval companies provide the boats and crews, and have either US Navy or Marine troops man the guns.  If the US Navy or whatever navy does not have the vessels in their system to perform these tasks, I am sure if they were to contract this out, they would get some providers.  And the concept below, with putting a tank on top of one of these vessels looks funny, but the more I think about it, the more I like it.  

    But back to the legalities– if the UN will only allow a Nation’s military to perform these activities, then maybe this military/private military combination is a possible solution?  In Iraq, you would see US military escorting civilian driven trucks hauling food and water and fuel all the time–let’s just switch this over to water convoy operations.  And the targeting system on an Abrams tank would be very impressive on the high seas and could be used to effectively shut down these guys.  

(more…)

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Industry Talk: Logistics And Building the AK-47 of Facilities

Filed under: Industry Talk — Tags: , , , — Matt @ 1:15 PM

     This was a great little article about a topic we hear little of.  When Iraq finishes up, what are we going to do with all that stuff over there?  Personally, I would like to see us re-use most of that equipment, and take it into our other theaters of operation.  Unfortunately, cost will dictate what we do with these items.  The question to ask, is it more beneficial to scrap or sell that stuff locally, or pay the costs in fuel and shipping to get it to another location and reuse it?  My thoughts are that we should be reusing this stuff, but the fact of the matter is is that a lot of stuff was built by the lowest bidder and is just crap.  The parts on these facilities are substandard and are not universally used on all equipment, and the facilities themselves are not really quality products that could be used long term.  Which brings me to my next point.

      Equipment we use in the war zones should be built to last, and built to be reusable and interchangeable with other equipment.  I like the Southwest Airlines concept of one plane, one set of parts, and universal maintenance and knowledge about that plane.  We should be applying the same concept to logistics in today’s wars.  If we are using ten different types of tents, then that requires ten different types of parts, and a repair facility that knows how to repair all ten.  Same thing with trailer facilities over in Iraq.

     The shower trailers, for example, should all be constructed to the same standard and design specifications.  The intent is that a repair specialist(military or civilian)in Al Asad Air Base should be able to check out a Balad Air Base shower trailer and say this is familiar and I can repair this.  That they have the parts available, because the parts are universally used throughout the world.  The designs should be simple, durable, dependable, transportable, and have parts that are interchangeable with other units.  We should be making shower trailers and other facilities more like the AK-47 Assault Rifle.  It would cost less in the long run, it would free up the time of the military or civilians tasked with repairing these things, and this equipment could follow us where ever we go out there.  And I don’t see this war ending anytime soon. The concept of the Forward Operating Base(FOB) or mini-camp will continue to be a common theme, and especially if our generals continue pounding on the theme of not commuting to your office.  Small camps are essential to fighting in today’s 4th and 5th generation type wars.

(more…)

Monday, October 6, 2008

Industry Talk: The Montreux Document

  I know that this is a little old, but I still thought it was important to mention.  So why is a document about clarifying the rules for private military and security companies important?  My answer is because it helps to legitimize the industry and gives us all a framework of rules to operate by in the various war zones out there.  Wether or not this document is effective in keeping the companies in line is up for debate, but it is a start.  And I think what this document is really useful for, is getting the various companies and countries and agencies talking about the subject and consolidating the rules that apply to the industry.  In essence, to make everyone happy so they can talk about the next step of utilizing the services of these companies.  So talking is good for everyone.

    There is no question that the industry would like to be more involved in Africa, and especially with the advent of AFRICOM(US Africa Command).  But Africa has some history with shady mercenary operations. The international community has had some resistance to allowing anything that resembles a mercenary force to operate in Africa because of this history, and that is what the industry is up against now.  

(more…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress