Maritime Security « Feral Jundi

Monday, February 27, 2012

France: Regulation, Expansion Of French PMSC’s Urged By Members Of Parliament

Filed under: France,Industry Talk,Libya,Maritime Security — Tags: Argus, France, Global X, Industry Talk, Libya, Maritime Security, oil, private security — Matt @ 11:38 AM

“Global sales of the sector(security) are difficult to evaluate, but the specialists put it between $100 billion and $200 billion a year,” the report said, adding that the Foreign Ministry puts the figure as high as $400 billion for the total market for security and defense services.
Some 5,000 security firms operate in the world market, which is changing continuously and sometimes with a hazy line between security and military practices, hence the usefulness of calling them security and defense service companies.
Of the French firms, average annual sales is 3 million euros ($4 million). The largest is GEOS with 40 million euros followed by Risk & Co with 28 million euros, the report said.

Very interesting article and France is now joining China in this ‘re-evaluation’ of PMSC viability. I think what we are seeing here is a realization by France that it is missing out on a massive market, and by not having a vibrant and competitive PMSC industry, that they are missing out strategically.

That last part is the most important part because like most of Europe, France needs oil. In a world where oil producing countries are threatened by regional instability or the demand continues to push supply, countries are looking to all and any means of achieving strategic advantage for those resources. Having French companies on the ground, working day in and day out with these oil rich, war torn nations, or protecting the various key individuals and projects within these zones, is one way to ‘influence’ and grab a larger piece of the ‘oil pie’ in those regions.

To further emphasize this last part, here is the quote that perked me up.

A visit to Libya showed the significant presence of “Anglo-Saxon companies,” which have used the uncertain situation on the ground to develop their businesses.
“Their presence seems to favor British economic interests,” the report said. “It seems very desirable, within the framework of Libyan law, for our societies to form partnerships to set themselves up for the long term in this country, as there are strong expectations toward France,” the report said.

The other oil related indicator of need is maritime security. France does not want to depend upon other nation’s PMSC’s to protect their flagged vessels. And those flagged vessels transport commerce and oil/gas. It is of national interest to ensure these vessels are protected and the economy of France is not negatively impacted by piracy. PMSC’s are a strategic asset that France can tap into to protect that interest.

French Navy commandos aboard cargo ships. The daily cost of a Navy team is 2,000 euros, compared with 3,000 euros charged by a private company, the report said.
A Royal Dutch Navy team on a cargo ship costs 80,000 euros, reflecting the deployment of 18 personnel, including a nurse. But the demand for onboard protection outstrips supply of Navy teams, and a flourishing private market has sprung up.
Some French oil companies have asked for Navy teams but have had to go to the private sector because squads were unavailable, Betto said…British companies dominate this sector, including Triskel, APMSS and Solace, with a U.S. specialist, Advanfort. An estimated 170 companies specializing in armed maritime protection were set up in Britain from Jan. 1 to Sept. 30 last year, the report said.
The only French firm in this market is Gallice. With annual sales of 20 million euros, it offers armed protection through an Irish subsidiary in order to avoid tangling with French law, the report said.

So France is putting military details on private vessels, and because the need outstrips the supply, they are having to look to the private sector for security–which means using British or other companies. I am sure that does not sit well with these French shipping companies. lol

Also, how is putting Naval commandos on private vessels the best use of that resource? Shouldn’t they be doing more important missions, like hostage rescue? Using highly trained commandos for basic protective duties is not a wise choice for this particular mission, and especially when you only have a limited number of those commandos.

Some of the companies mentioned in this article are Argus and a Global X. I have not heard anything about these companies, but here are some quotes about them below.

The European Union uses Argus, a Hungarian-registered company, for building security in Libya. The firm is led by French nationals, and using diplomatic status, the personnel carry weapons…A group of French companies — Geodis, GIE Access, Sodexo and Thales — has formed the Global X company to bid for contracts in U.N. peacekeeping operations, which is seen as a huge market. Such contracts would provide jobs for former French service personnel and create a presence where active French soldiers are not deployed.

UN peacekeeping operations? Interesting. Global X would be a serious contender as well, just because having french speakers is a big plus for a few places in Africa.

So there you have it. Libya and it’s oil, maritime security, and peacekeeping are the markets that France is looking at, and they estimate the global security and defense market to be a 400 billion dollar industry! Not only that, but PMSC’s are viewed as strategic assets, much how China is seeing this industry.

The US and Britain are already way ahead of most of the world when it comes to this industry thanks to ten years of constant war. But as more countries catch on, I imagine the market will evolve and become more interesting as time goes by.

The definition of the state and it’s monopoly on the use of force is changing as well. Countries are realizing that PMSC’s, if used properly, can be ‘real levers of influence’ to quote the report. If anyone has any info on these companies or the article below, feel free to comment. –Matt

Regulation, Expansion of French Private Security Firms Urged
Feb. 26, 2012
A bipartisan French parliamentary report is calling for recognition and regulation of private military companies, hoping to reverse the strong climate of rejection regarding security contractors.
The report, published Feb. 14 and co-authored by members Jean-Claude Viollet (Socialist) and Christian Menard (Union pour un Mouvement Populaire), points up the growth of business in private security and military activity over the last two decades, led by U.S. and British companies.
The sector has become so important, France can’t ignore it, the report said.

(more…)

Comments Off

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Maritime Security: The Security Costs Of Piracy For 2011?

Filed under: Maritime Security — Tags: armed guards on boats, costs, Maritime Security, One Earth Future Foundation, private security, Report — Matt @ 8:07 AM

Below I have posted this report that One Earth Future Foundation put together, and have also posted an article that describes a lack of reporting from private security companies that stopped attacks, due to liability reasons. My simple question here is how can we truly tally the cost effectiveness of armed security on boats, if we do not have accurate data inputs?

In the report, I went to page 16 to catch anything that perked me up. One figure talked about the cost of security equipment investments made by all the ships mentioned. Razor wire was the most preferred out of all of the security equipment listed. They averaged the value of all of the razor wire purchased last year at about $434,552,160! Wow, razor wire is quite the business. Acoustic devices like the LRAD came in at second costliest at $133,717,500.

Here are two quotes that I combined for further analysis of the statistics.

Average ransoms increased 25% from approximately $4 million in 2010 to $5 million in 2011…… In 2011, Somali pirates attacked 237 ships and successfully hijacked 28.

So that is 1.158 Billion dollars that shipping companies could have lost potentially if those 237 ships had actually been taken. Not to mention the costs of ransoms, medical care, transport, rescue or lawsuits for every hostage taken, and the rising costs of insurance premiums because of all of those potential hijackings. In other words, these statistics are misleading and they do not show the cost if security measures were not taken.

The other part of the report was the percentages of armed security on boats. Here is the quote.

Varying sources estimate that the additional costs of armed guards are anywhere between $30,000 and $100,000 per transit through the HRA. According to the Independent Maritime Security Association, the use of a private armed security team generally costs around $50,000 per transit. We have estimated that approximately 25% of vessels transiting the HRA employ armed guards. It is important to note that this figure of 25% is an estimation of the entire year of 2011. From discussions with leading shipping industry representatives, we understand that the proportion of vessels employing armed guards increased rapidly throughout 2011, and by the end of the year this figure was closer to 50% of vessels.
If there are approximately 42,450 transits through the HRA each year, then around 10,612 transits employ armed security. At an average cost of $50,000 per transit, the total costs of private armed security are estimated to be in the region of $530.6 million per year.

So here is the question. How can anyone say that if only 25% of the ships last year were covered by armed security, that armed security is not successful? Get back to me when 100 percent of the ships have armed security, and then we can talk about effectiveness.

Also, how many armed guards on boats were the primary reason why any of those 237 ships attacked were not taken, and how many of these hijackings were prevented because of navies? Because if we want to get technical, only 25% of the boats had armed security, yet the navies of the world with all of their might were involved as well, then who here is truly effective at preventing attacks? Whose cost is more justified?

Which brings us to the other article in my little collection below about the lack of good reportage by private security companies on the attacks they prevent. In order to prove effectiveness, then accurate figures on attacks prevented by private armed security on boats is crucial. Who knows how many actual attacks were prevented by armed security over the last couple of years? Are all the companies from all over the world reporting their actions, or are they not reporting because of fear of liability issues?

“Security teams are shaping this on-board decision-making for reasons of liability, because of the action they may have taken to defend ships against attack,” said Church, who works at a counter-piracy base in Northwood, England……
As many as half of all ships sailing through the region now use armed guards, the foundation said at the forum. That’s up from 25 per cent earlier this year, and companies providing security earn $530.6 million annually, it estimated. A total of 42,450 vessels pass through the region annually, it says.
Church cited a “disconnect” between the number of attacks expected last year, based on military intelligence assessments of pirates’ strength, and levels in 2009 and 2010. A “plausible argument” can be made that the increase in armed guards was the cause, he said.
Somali pirate attacks rose to 237 in 2011 from 219 in the previous year, according to figures from the London-based International Maritime Bureau. No legal framework exists to establish how armed guards should interact with pirates and what happens if any attackers are killed or injured, Pottengal Mukundan, the bureau’s director, said at the forum.”

So those are just a few thoughts on security costs and where we are at. I also like to bring this up to bring some balance to the discussion about cost effectiveness. Most of all though, these statistics and estimations add to the overall picture. If only 25 % of the ships transiting through the HRA had armed security in 2011 and we are now just at 50%, then we have a market with room to grow. –Matt

Security Equipment and Guards: A notable trend in 2011 was the rapid escalation in the use of private armed security. The total cost of both security equipment and armed guards in 2011 was between $1.06 and $1.16 billion.

One Earth Future Foundation Page 16
3. The Cost of Security Equipment and Guards
An increasing number of ship owners are seeking to protect their vessels against pirate attack when transiting the HRA with security equipment and/or private armed (or unarmed) security guards.
a) Security Equipment
According to the latest (fourth) version of Best Management Practices for Protection against Somalia Based Piracy (BMP4), a number of security measures should be taken by vessels to prevent and defend against a pirate attack. BMP4 describes these ship protection measures as “the most basic that are likely to be effective,” and ship owners are encouraged to conduct a full risk assessment prior to entering the high risk area. Suggested measures include (but are not limited to): Enhanced watch keeping/lookout/ and vigilance, maneuvering practice, enhanced protection of/and controlling access to the bridge, closed circuit television , upper deck lighting, razor wire, alarms, water spray and foam monitors, citadels/safe muster points.

(more…)

Comments (4)

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Maritime Security: Philippines To Allow Private Security Guards On Ships

Filed under: Maritime Security,Philippines — Tags: armed guards on boats, armed security, Letter Of Marque, Maritime Security, Philippines — Matt @ 5:57 AM

Between 2006 and 2011, a total of 769 sailors from the Philippines were seized by pirates operating in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. It is believed that all but the 26 were released unharmed and upon payment by their principals of ransom.
Earlier this month, the DFA said the government had come up with a plan to protect Filipino sailors from Somali pirates.

Excellent news and it is good to see another country getting on board with the concept of ‘armed guards on boats’. As you can see with that quote up top, it is definitely of national interest that something be done.

Although it would be nice to see them fire up the Letter of Marque as a legal tool to manage these armed guards on boats. Either way, this is a great move and I am sure Filipino boat owners will have no problem in finding PSC’s that can do this work, either in the Philippines or elsewhere. –Matt

PH to allow private security guards on ships as anti-piracy measure
By Jerry E. Esplanada
January 30th, 2012
The Philippines has given Manila-flagged merchant vessels the go-ahead to deploy private security groups to minimize the risk Filipino seafarers face from Somali pirates in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean, according to the Department of Foreign Affairs.
The move, however, is “subject to Philippine shipping companies” adherence to strict guidelines promulgated by the Maritime Industry Authority and the International Maritime Organization,” the DFA said Monday.
“In their participation at meetings to combat piracy in the IMO, the United Nations and other fora, Philippine government officials have been advocating the importance of promoting the safety of Filipino seamen. This advocacy is being supported by other governments,” it also said.

(more…)

Comments Off

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Company Spotlight: Triton International And The Somaliland Coastguard

Filed under: Company Spotlight,Maritime Security,Somalia — Tags: coastguard, piracy, Somalia, Somaliland, Training, Triton International — Matt @ 10:17 PM

There have been several measures of success. First, in 2010 alone, the Triton-trained Somaliland Coastguard captured, prosecuted, and jailed more than 120 pirates. Officials in Somaliland have said that pirates rarely cross into their waters from renowned pirate havens in the region due to the Coastguard’s reputation for intercepting them. Second, as a result of these measures, the World Food Program considers Berbera a safe port for the delivery and distribution of food aid destined for the region. Finally, the Coastguard has also intercepted vessels intending to conduct IUU fishing.

There are two great articles below and be sure to check them out. The first one is written by the CEO of Triton International describing their training program for the Somaliland Coastguard and the second article is more recent and describes the cost effectiveness of the program.

The thing to emphasize here is that this company is providing a much needed service, and anything that can professionalize the navies and coastguards in Somalia to do this work will only help in the overall strategy of reducing piracy.

On the other hand, the danger of professionalizing these forces is that they leave the coastguard and go on to be pirates themselves. Still, something must be done, and as long as the Somaliland paymasters keep paying the troops and keeping them happy, they will stick around.

As to the company Triton and how much business they are getting, I am not sure. Maybe some folks from the company would like to come up and talk a little about how they are doing? The below information was about as much as I could find and bravo to them for a job well done training the Somaliland Coastguard. Check it out. –Matt

Triton International logo.

Thanks to Nic for providing the photo.

Skulls and Crossroads
November 18, 2010
by Simon Jones
As the skiff approached the bulker, and moved down the flank of the vessel, the crew came to the railings and watched the men, their presence a familiar sight in the Gulf of Aden yet, unlike other skiffs the crew had seen on their regular transits through these waters, and to the crews relief and frequent reassurance, these skiffs were not an attack from pirates, rather the bulkers security escort into the port of Berbera by the Somaliland coastguard, the maritime police force from the breakaway republic in the north west corner of Somalia.
Different Recent History
Somaliland has always maintained its difference and distance from the rest of Somalia, from the colonial period of the British protectorate, brief independence in 1960 and when the attempt to unite with the rest of Somalia failed; during the bloody and destructive civil war, resulting in their withdrawal and the re-establishing of their independence in 1991.
Declaring themselves the independent Republic of Somaliland; a status that despite the total lack of international or UN recognition, has resulted in Somaliland’s 19 years of self governance, independent democratically elected leaders, their own constitution, currency and passport system. In a country that has received little or no International aid or relief support, the ability to protect your borders is essential; when you have 860 Kms of Gulf of Aden coastline, containing ruthless pirates from the neighbouring country – it’s critical.
The Coast Guard
The Somaliland coastguard was established in the first few years of the new millennium from the maritime wing of the Somaliland police service following a rise in smuggling, trafficking and piracy. Its command structure was built on Somaliland veterans of the Somali Navy. Based in the economically strategic port town of Berbera, with their coastline split into three sectors and a total of 14 Coast Guard stations located along the length of the coastline, which are manned by just under 400 Coast Guard personnel.

(more…)

Comments (1)