Feral Jundi

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Letter Of Marque: Reconsidering The Letter Of Marque–Utilizing Private Security Providers Against Piracy

   A big thanks to Cannoneer #4 for posting this in the comments of yesterday’s post on piracy. Other folks sent me the same link to this publication and I was very interested in what Theodore Richard had to say.  To say the least, I was impressed and this paper was well researched and footnoted. (as a good legal type paper should be)

   This was also published in a contract law journal, which tells me that the guy writing this believed it could survive the scrutiny of his peers.  This should be of particular interest to any legal specialists in other countries who would like a source to draw from for exploring how the LoM could help your nation.

   What surprised me is the listing of all the companies that were involved with maritime security in Somalia.  I learned a bunch, and he started out with Hart’s operations there.  Theodore talked about the various politics and financing issues that either contributed to the success or failure of these companies, and I found that to be very informative.

   The author also went over how a modern day LoM would look, and all the various uses for the LoM.  He does a great job in calling upon historical reference to support his modern day applications, and what kind of tweaking it would take to make it work.

   Probably my favorite part of the paper is the way he was able to confront the Max Weber argument, and define exactly how the LoM fits into that discussion.

   The other part of this paper that he goes over, that I continue to forget to talk about in my discussions about the LoM, is the license and bonding aspect of modern day privateering. The author uses the example of America’s modern day bail enforcement officers or ‘bounty hunters’, and discusses how this could be a model.  The point of a license is to ensure you know what you are doing, and bonding puts your money where your mouth is. In this case, a surety bond industry for privateers would be needed if the start up company did not have it’s own financing for such a thing. It would also depend upon what the congress wants, because they are the ones who issue the LoM, pay the bounties and run the Prize Courts.      Let me know what you guys think and check it out. –Matt

Edit: 5/31/2010 -David Isenberg posted a deal that discussed this paper and how the LoM could be used for today’s issues with piracy.  Check it out here.

—————————————————————–

Reconsidering the Letter of Marque: Utilizing Private Security Providers Against Piracy

Theodore Richard

Public Contract Law Journal, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 411-464, Spring 2010

Abstract:

This article examines how letters of marque could be revived to effectively empower the private sector to assist governments in dealing with modern piracy. It examines Somali piracy, the development and different uses of letters of marque and privateers, the current legal framework relating to piracy, Somalia’s decade-long experience with maritime security contractors, the use of maritime contractors outside of Somalia, and addresses concerns involving private maritime security. The article concludes that unless governments provide security everywhere and all the time, the market will demand private security. Governments can effectively manage and control this security in the maritime environment without inventing a new legal scheme out of whole cloth: letters of marque can provide authorization, regulation, and accountability.

——————————————————————–

(From the paper)

As privateering matured, privateers faced signi?cant regulations, including highly detailed and precise requirements for legal captures that were, in turn, subject to rigid enforcement in specialized prize courts.  Serious transgressions, like murder, rape, or mutiny, could result in imprisonment or death.

For example, a British privateer captain was executed for robbery constituting piracy in 1759. Improper privateer conduct resulted in the loss of the commission, the bond, and, if applicable, the prize. Thus most British and American privateers in the eighteen and nineteenth centuries were neither dishonorable nor piratical. Importantly privateers played a signi?cant role in ending piracy.

*****

 The western world’s “Golden Age of Piracy” began in 1715, following the 1713 Peace of Utrecht, which brought an end to a decade of European warfare involving all the continent’s major powers. The upsurge in piracy was caused by the unemployment of signi?cant numbers of sailors: the English navy alone discharged 54,000 sailors and privateers could no longer obtain commissions to attack European commerce. This “Golden Age of Piracy” peaked around 1720 and reached an abrupt end in 1725. More than anyone else, the man responsible for bringing this age of piracy to an end was Woodes Rogers.

  In an early example of the “revolving door” between the private and public sector employment, Rogers was a privateer before being appointed  as the Governor of Bahamas, then the pirate capital of the Americas. In order to reform this territory, Rogers dispersed the pirates of the Caribbean with privateers.

  The piracy problem during this era was solved through a combination of tactics:

(1) the British Parliament passed legislation allowing overseas piracy trials, rather than requiring suspected pirates to be brought to England;

(2) captured pirates were publicly tried and executed;

(3) pirates who turned themselves in were pardoned;

(4) naval patrols were increased;

(5) rewards or bounties were promised for the capture of pirates; and

(6) private ships were licensed to attack and capture pirates.

  Of these methods, the last is the most relevant here.

Link to paper here.

Friday, April 9, 2010

Strategy: The New Rules Of War Author John Arquilla and Victor Hanson, Hoover Institute

Filed under: Letter Of Marque,Strategy,Video — Matt @ 2:45 AM

Rule 1: “Many and Small” Beats “Few and Large.”

Rule 2: Finding Matters More Than Flanking.

Rule 3: Swarming Is the New Surging.

*****

This was an awesome interview, and if you want, you can watch this in five parts or in one viewing. If you are overseas and bandwidth is a problem, the first option might be your best. Just follow the link to the video, and other options are in the drop down menu on the right hand side.

One thing I would like you to do while listening to these guys, is to think where PMC’s fit into the New Rules of War. Of course you could look at private industry in terms of only defensive operations, but I also want you to look at private industry for offensive operations. How would a PMC adapt and form, if they were to abide by these rules up top? And if you really want to something to chew on, how would you defeat an enemy that was a practitioner of these rules?

For me, I always like looking at the old ways of warfare, and see if today’s strategies are just another form of those old ways. Or if something old, can be outfitted to the new, much like putting on old car body on a modern day frame and engine. Old and new–or hybrid warfare. I think that a modern day interpretation of the Letter of Marque fits nicely within this concept.

Privateers during the Revolutionary War and War of 1812 are a prime example of what I am talking about. Private industry answered the call by providing ‘the many and small’ just because it is easily accomplished. Private industry could not compete by making a large warship, but it certainly could compete by using small and cheap boats.

The ‘finding’ portion of the rule, fits nicely with what the LoM and privateers were able to produce. Private industry was focused on finding their cash cow that was floating around out in the ocean. Privateering made an industry out of ‘finding’, and this free market based warfare would not stop until it was told to (via an expired LoM) or there was no more enemy merchant vessels (cash cows) to attack. If you assign a value to your enemy, or allow privateers to take what the enemy has, well now you have just created a ‘finding’ mechanism.

Finally, the swarming concept is exactly what happens when you unleash private industry upon your enemy. A congress could issue thousands of LoM’s during a war, thus causing a swarming effect upon merchant vessels. During the Revolutionary War and War of 1812, congress issued hundreds of LoMs. With that setup, they actually had companies competing over the capture of these vessels.

From wikipedia, here is a quick shot at the numbers. And of course, there was the best of the best during the Revolutionary War when it came to privateering. Check it out here. “The American privateers are thought to have seized up to 300 British ships. One of the more successful of these ships was the Prince de Neufchatel, which once captured nine British prizes in swift succession in the English Channel.”

I will even add one more component to this LoM concept. Private industry only succeeds when it is more organized and more innovative than their competition. Each company is looking for an edge to beat the other companies for the prize. That competition, and the innovation it spurs, is what makes the concept so lethal when applied to warfare.

Well anyways, watch the videos and let me know what you guys think. Cool stuff. -Matt

Watch the entire clip here. (38 minutes)

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Maritime Security: Marque Star Signs On Former Dell V.P. Steve Belt As CTO, And Buys A Boat

     “We stand ready to meet any challenge. Marque Star is seeing tremendous industry response and is accepting deposits for any additional new contracts. We can meet the demand as we are rapidly growing our flotilla of capable ships to deliver customized value to our clients,” says Agbeli Ameko, SVP of International Business Development.

*****

   Interesting news with Marque Star, and they have definitely popped up onto the radar screen lately. At this pace, I will have to do a company spotlight on these guys. lol

   Now will all this activity transfer into an actual increase in market share and business for the companies involved? Who knows, but when I see folks making all of these types of high end business moves, someone is reading the ‘Tea Leaves’ and getting ready.

   They also bought a pretty beefy boat called the Archangel Michael, and for their sake I hope this doesn’t turn into a MacArthur venture for them. We will keep our eye on this one. –Matt

——————————————–

Marque Star Signs on Steve Belt as CTO

April 05, 2010

WASHINGTON–(BUSINESS WIRE)–The Former Dell Inc. Vice President, Steve Belt, has joined the private maritime security company Marque Star as CTO. Belt brings advanced technologies which will better equip Marque Star in its Pursuit to Take on Piracy and Secure the World’s Oceans for its Clients. Steve Belt will be responsible for the worldwide deployment of Marque Star’s industry-leading Command and Control and Governance Systems.

As VP, Business Client Product Development he was responsible for 550 employees across four international sites, including Austin, Taipei, Shanghai, and Limerick Ireland, and worldwide Client Platform Hardware and Software development for Dell. He also was responsible for the Office of the CTO and Advanced Engineering organizations which develop and enable the technology used in Dell’s client products. “Marque Star’s vision of using advanced technology to protect their clients from all forms of maritime security threats, coupled with my background in the technology industry, was a perfect match. I am excited about the opportunity to join Marque Star and help bring the latest in high-tech to the challenges of maritime security,” says Steve Belt, CTO Marque Star.

(more…)

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Africa: The Anarchy Gravy Train

     What we are seeing is the decline of the classic African liberation movement and the proliferation of something else — something wilder, messier, more violent, and harder to wrap our heads around. If you’d like to call this war, fine. But what is spreading across Africa like a viral pandemic is actually just opportunistic, heavily armed banditry.

*****

   I was turned on to Mr. Gettleman’s stuff after doing a little searching around on all things Africa, and I am impressed with what he has reported on.  He seems to have a feel for what is really going on, and has boiled it down to it’s most basic root causes.  From Somalia to the Congo, it is all the same.  It is the Anarchy Gravy Train, and all of these seedy and despicable groups mentioned, all benefit from this chaos. They don’t want order, because it is a threat to their lively-hood.

   At best what I can determine from all of this, is that these groups have found a means of survival through terror. It not only feeds them but gets them anything they want….anything.  That’s pretty powerful, and these struggling governments who are dealing with these groups are having a hard time selling a better deal.  So these thugs look at government as a threat to their good deal and terror based businesses.

   It is the same with the current drug war, and you could easily say that the cartels only benefit from a weak government and weak borders.  Anarchy, or something close to anarchy, is a place in which enterprising criminals can really flourish.

   Look at Haiti right now, and that would be an excellent study for this concept.  With the earthquake came instant anarchy.  Infrastructure is destroyed, prisons crumble and convicts escape, and the government or any semblance of it is not able to protect or adequately help their people.  Crime increases, and business based on that anarchy increases.  Things like charging for shade under a tree, or selling child slaves, all because there is no one around to tell them that they can’t do that. That is what Africa is all about, and it is sad.

   So in a sea of chaos and anarchy, how do you establish order?  That is the million dollar question, and in Africa, it is a question that is continually pondered day in and day out, and with little success.

   From my point of view as a security professional and as an independent contractor or businessman, I could give some suggestions as to how to bring order to chaos.  Although my suggestions might not be the most politically correct solutions, they are none the less just ideas to think about.

   Business must be supported and protected by government.  I can’t stress enough how important business is to a government.  If you have the support of business, and you actually do things that increase business or brings a return on investment for the community, then I think countries in Africa will be able to do a better job at diminishing the power of these free ranging thugs. Telecommunications is a big one, and any effort of the government to promote that and get it out to the masses, will only help in other areas of commerce and governance. Educations and the promotion of innovation is another.  Anything a government can do, to stimulate business and get people occupied with that, as opposed to committing crimes or fighting each other, will help. It produces jobs, and increases the quality of living by bringing more cash into local economies.

   Security is the second area that needs to be a priority.  Governments must have adequate protection, and they must do all they can to protect it’s people.  If they have the resources to raise an army and police, then that is one way.  If they have the resources, but not the manpower, then using assistance of other countries or contracting a PMC would be another way.  Or the third way a country could protect itself and it’s people, is through the means of Letter of Marque and Reprisal.  To issue a LoM to individuals, and have them focused on taking the assets away from enemies of the state, and/or killing and capturing those enemies would be an excellent way of kick starting a government.  This is privateering, and governments could turn to this activity as a cost effective way of defeating it’s enemies and eradicating these free ranging thugs and rebel groups that we read about all the time.

   You could also use bounty hunting as a means to eradicate or capture these thugs.  If countries could contract the services of competent companies to do this task, then that would buy them the time necessary to raise a police or army.  And as the author pointed out below, once you take out the leaders of these roving bands of thugs, they tend to dissipate. Focusing the energies of a professional and competent company on the task of removing this threat, could be a real help in the over all effort of creating peace and stability within a country.

   My point with both of these activities, is that countries should have the right and means to contract with professional forces who could accomplish the task of destroying any threats to a government.  Especially in countries that are deemed failed states, or pretty damn close.  Or countries that are so overwhelmed that even their current forces at maximum levels, are unable to do the task (like in Mexico).

   The example of what I am talking about, is early America and our use of privateers in order to defeat the British on the high seas.  We did not have a sufficiently sized Continental Navy, and privateers was the answer.  Using mercenaries was our answer to manpower deficiencies during the Battle of Derne back during the Barbary Pirates days.(our very first foreign action as a young country) Or even look at the use of contractors today by the US–there are thousands of us working in the war. Why does the west continue to deny other countries whom they call friends, their right to defend self in such a way? Because currently, the means we are currently allowing countries to use, are pathetic.

   We say things like ‘only the UN is authorized to be in the Congo’.  And then what happens?  They fail miserably, and things get worse.  We say companies like Executive Outcomes are unjust and illegitimate, yet when they are contracted to help a government, like with Sierra Leone, they were successful. How about we put that choice in the hands of the governments of countries, and stop dictating what we think works or doesn’t work?

   Ideally it would be nice if all countries in Africa, had the ability to raise armies that were sufficiently organized and violent to deal with their threats.  Yet time and time again, governments fail to create such things.  The local populations are not able to produce recruits for these armies that are able to operate at an advanced level.  Education and health deficiencies are contributors.  Corruption in society and government is another deficiency.  There are a number of reasons why local males (or females) are not able to do the job.  Some countries are just decimated do to war or famine, and to say that they could raise armies that can do the job is a joke.  So where do they turn to, to get the strategic advantage?

   Well if you introduce a company with some capability, and mix that up with the best local troops a country can offer, hence creating a hybrid force that could do the job, then that would be one way.  Having a company do it all, or even another country do it all, would be another.  This is not rocket science, and with the unorganized thugs we are seeing in most of Africa, forces like what I am talking about and what Eeben brought to the table with EO, are the types of forces that would end this ‘anarchy gravy train’.

   The final component of destroying the anarchy gravy train, is international will.  The mandates that the UN has operated on, are terrible.  You must work to end wars, and that takes violence of action.  You do not send in peacekeepers to somehow bring stability during an active war.  The war must end, and that only happens after one side has broken the will of the other.  Or you destroy the leadership of that other side.  Only after the war has ended and the parties on both sides is exhausted, can you then begin to introduce peacekeepers.

   What instead should happen, is wars should be fought and ended as quickly as possible.  It takes extreme violence and strategy that far surpasses the other side, to make that happen.  It also takes political will, not only from the government, but of the countries of the world who are looking on.

   Just imagine if the UN was created back during the early days of America?  And the countries of the world decided to send the UN to the Americas, to stand in between the rebels and the British?  Do you think for a second, that the UN could accomplish that task?  If anything, colonial rebel forces would just attack and steal from the UN, much like they do now a days in places like Africa. Or because the UN is so ineffectual, they could just claim that they are a tool of the British, and then turn the UN into a target of the rebels–much like local forces do to the UN today. And as the UN mission fails in America, donors to the UN continue to question why it even exists, much like countries do now.  Pathetic really.

   To end this Anarchy Gravy Train in places like Africa, we need to start looking at ideas that work.  Ideas that have continued to be attacked because of misconceptions coming from the media or from those who stand to benefit from the Anarchy Gravy Train.  I will continue to offer the lessons of the past, and how they could be applied to today.  But until the powers that be, get realistic about actions that will bring the kind of peace and stability these countries need, we will continue to watch this horrid spectacle. –Matt

——————————————————————

Africa’s Forever Wars

Why the continent’s conflicts never end.

MARCH/APRIL 2010

BY JEFFREY GETTLEMAN

There is a very simple reason why some of Africa’s bloodiest, most brutal wars never seem to end: They are not really wars. Not in the traditional sense, at least. The combatants don’t have much of an ideology; they don’t have clear goals. They couldn’t care less about taking over capitals or major cities — in fact, they prefer the deep bush, where it is far easier to commit crimes. Today’s rebels seem especially uninterested in winning converts, content instead to steal other people’s children, stick Kalashnikovs or axes in their hands, and make them do the killing. Look closely at some of the continent’s most intractable conflicts, from the rebel-laden creeks of the Niger Delta to the inferno in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and this is what you will find.

What we are seeing is the decline of the classic African liberation movement and the proliferation of something else — something wilder, messier, more violent, and harder to wrap our heads around. If you’d like to call this war, fine. But what is spreading across Africa like a viral pandemic is actually just opportunistic, heavily armed banditry. My job as the New York Times’ East Africa bureau chief is to cover news and feature stories in 12 countries. But most of my time is spent immersed in these un-wars.

I’ve witnessed up close — often way too close — how combat has morphed from soldier vs. soldier (now a rarity in Africa) to soldier vs. civilian. Most of today’s African fighters are not rebels with a cause; they’re predators. That’s why we see stunning atrocities like eastern Congo’s rape epidemic, where armed groups in recent years have sexually assaulted hundreds of thousands of women, often so sadistically that the victims are left incontinent for life. What is the military or political objective of ramming an assault rifle inside a woman and pulling the trigger? Terror has become an end, not just a means.

(more…)

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Maritime Security: The Evolution Of The Somali Piracy Business Model

     “The Piracy Business Model” describes a system that guarantees every participating pirate a defined share of the ransom money. It is sophisticated enough that it includes “A” shares and “B” shares similar to preferred and common shares in legitimate publicly traded companies around the globe. Just like with preferred stock, there is a premium for entering the game. Piracy “A” shares are earned by bringing weapons and being the first pirate to board a ship during attack. The lower-level militiamen that fill the roster each earn a “B” share. Once a ship is hijacked and brought to port, it’s time to balance the books by paying suppliers, investors, local elders for anchoring rights, and “B” shareholders. The remaining funds are split among the “A” shares and distributed accordingly to the “A” shareholders. 

*****

   I have to tell you that I find this evolution of piracy or ‘privateering’ in Somalia to be fascinating. What is interesting to watch is that the Somalis are applying modern day business practices and finance to the concept.  If you would like to study a similar model, just check out early America with our privateers during the Revolutionary War and War of 1812.

   So let’s go over a couple of the points in these two articles I posted, that caught my eye.  The first is Fourth Generation Somali Piracy.  The idea being, is that pirates would hijack ships, use key valuable personnel as human shields, and then convert that boat into a operations platform or ‘mother ship’.  Makes sense, and I could see them doing that.

   The idea being is that sailing that hijacked ship all the way back to their failed state’s harbor is time consuming and inefficient.  You could stay out at sea, live more comfortably on a newer hijacked vessel, and continue to expand your piracy operations in places where navies are not operating at. I will keep my eyes open for any proof of this happening.

   These pirates are smart, and they will find a way to get to waters in which the EU, NATO and the US is unable to reach.  They will also go after weak and unsuspecting vessels, which means going to places where piracy really isn’t a big thing of that region.

     Armed security details on boats will really be the only counter to this, because today’s navies are just not able to cover the kind of territory we are talking about.  Plus the cost for today’s naval activities is astronomical.  Billions of dollars are being spent every year to go after pirates in small boats armed with AK’s. The pirates are the small and many–western navies are the few and large. ( a reference to the ‘new rules of war‘)

     The other article is just a touch up on the politics of piracy.  Now that these guys are making the fat cash, they are able to sling dollars to politicians so that they can protect their business.  Pretty standard for organized crime or any venture that wants to expand their horizons and add stability to their operation.  And with the stock market approach, politicians and jihadists can all invest in these pirate ventures.  The quote up top indicates that their little stock market concept is evolving and dare I say, the pirates are applying Kaizen to their set up? lol

   Now to finish up on my solution to this thing.  We are now in a prime opportunity to once again apply the concepts of yesteryear to today’s piracy.  We should be encouraging the shipping industry to outfit their boats with competent security teams, complete with sufficient firepower to deal with all potential threats.  We should also have a legal system in place that can effectively deal with and integrate with this private security apparatus. And with the advent of pirates being captured, having an effective international courts system that these thugs worry about and fear, would be highly advantageous. And of course, the world’s navies should continue to hunt and destroy/capture these folks, and work with the security teams of boats, in order to effectively deal with this scourge.

    I would mention using the Letter of Marque as another tool to combat piracy, but I doubt today’s modern navies would appreciate that kind of thing.  Maybe when countries are financially drained from their anti-piracy ventures, will they consider such tools. Until then, anti-piracy will give these large lumbering navies something to do.  They have to justify their budgets and existence somehow, right? lol But my point with the LoM, is that creating a free market kill/capture mechanism to go after these guys, is one of the only ways to really keep up with this ever evolving piracy business model, and especially in the commons of the open sea. –Matt

——————————————————————

Somali Piracy Tactics Evolve; Threats Could Expand Globally

April 2010

By Michael G. Frodl

Underwriters and shippers are as concerned about what the United States and other powers won’t do against Somali pirates, as they are about what the pirates will do against ships they insure, own and operate.

While the Gulf of Aden is a relatively safe passage for the deployment of warships through a narrow corridor in a vast gulf, some Somali pirates have retaken the initiative in the waters of the Indian Ocean off East Africa.

Continuing to treat Somali pirates as a homogenous, if not a monolithic threat, is not working.

The current approach is showing diminishing returns on investments in anti-piracy. The deployment of modern warships costs easily more than a billion dollars a year, if not more, to sustain. Risks to shipping and the costs of underwriting continue to rise in the ocean where 60 percent of global commerce transits.

Meanwhile, the return on investment in piracy, which basically involves arming and supplying a handful of men and sending them out on a mother ship and two skiffs, only continues to rise.

(more…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress