Feral Jundi

Friday, December 3, 2010

Industry Talk: US Concerned By Somali Private Military, CEO Of Saracen International Claims It’s Not Them

     AP named the private security company involved in training the troops as Saracen International, a Uganda-based firm headed by a South African former special forces soldier called Bill Pelser. In a November statement the Puntland government said Saracen had been hired to establish its “marine forces”, while documents from the Somali presidency this year suggested the company had been hired to train the presidential guard in Mogadishu.

     But in a phone interview, Pelser told the Guardian claims of his company’s involvement were “bullshit”, and said he would take legal action against the media. “I have already given a statement to the UN security council on this. None of my assets are involved in Somalia. It must be another company called Saracen,” he said. -story here.

     Pelser denied being involved in the training program in Puntland or the one for the presidential guard in Mogadishu, saying he merely made introductions for another company called Saracen Lebanon. Lebanese authorities have no record of a company called Saracen. Pelser did not respond to requests for contact information for Saracen Lebanon.

     This story just came across my radar, so I am still trying to piece together what’s what.  Although unlike the main stream media, I will give Mr. Pelser the benefit of the doubt and trust that his company is not involved. He says that there is another company called Saracen Lebanon that is training this militia for anti-piracy operations.

    It also seem this militia is being privately funded by a donor from the middle east. This donor is also providing ‘120 new pickup trucks and six small aircraft for patrolling the coast’. That’s impressive, and I would be very curious as to who this mystery donor is and what kind of aircraft they are willing to provide?  If anyone has details, please feel free to expand in the comments.

    The folks that Puntland hired for keeping everything straight are interesting as well. Pierre Prosper was one of them, and this guy is like a legal super star for everything Africa.  He was hired by the Bush Administration to deal with the various war crimes issues in Africa. I am sure he knows what company is being used too.  Check out the link to his profile at the law firm he works at, and you will get an idea of what he is all about. Like I said, if anyone has anything to add, feel free to correct the record or add to this post so we can get the story straight. –Matt

Edit: 12/4/2010- This is interesting.  The president of Puntland was recently questioned by reporters about this anti-piracy force, and he says they will do what they have to do to raise this army and get them trained. So he is not denying or backing down.

(a portion of this article posted below)

Somalia: Puntland pres meets Kuwait emir, defends anti-piracy force

3 Dec 3, 2010

……Anti-piracy force

Puntland’s leader said that the government of Puntland “will not seek approval” from anyone when it comes to security matters.

“For nearly two years, we have requested the international community to help us establish anti-piracy troops and to construct monitoring stations along Puntland’s coast to fight pirates…but we received no answer,” the president said.

He indicated that there are “questions” about Puntland’s agreement with Saracen International, a South Africa-based maritime security company that inked a deal to train anti-piracy troops in Puntland last month.

“What is important is that Puntland improves its security. Without sufficient security, there can be no investment because investment depends on security and stability,” Puntland’s leader said.

He noted that the anti-piracy troops, which are to number 1,050 soldiers when training completes, will still need equipment and telecommunications gear in order to commence the fight against Somali pirates who threaten the world’s shipping lanes.

President Farole said that only African Union peacekeepers (AMISOM) are allowed to bring weapons to Somalia under U.N. regulations, adding: “We will continue to seek equipment and other support for our anti-piracy troops when training completes.”

He indicated that the Puntland-Saracen agreement is “in the spirit of the Istanbul Declaration, which encourages public-private partnerships” for Somalia.

Link to story here.

US concerned by Somali private military

1,000-man militia being trained in north Somalia

Somalia: Puntland signed an agreement with Sarecen Company to train its Marine Forces

US concerned by Somali private military

By MATTHEW LEEThursday, December 2, 2010

The Obama administration raised concerns Thursday about a private military force aimed at combatting piracy in northern Somalia’s semiautonomous Puntland region.

State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said the U.S. has been aware of the operation, but is not involved in any way. He said the U.S. has unanswered questions about the backing and purpose of the project, which has begun training an armed force of up to 1,050 men in Puntland.

“We are aware that Puntland authorities have contracted with a private security company to assist them with counter-piracy in the region,” Crowley told reporters. “We were not consulted about this program. We are not funding it. We are concerned about the lack of transparency regarding its funding, objectives and scope.”

Crowley said the U.S. is seeking more information about the force, which officials in the region say is being trained by a private security firm called Saracen International.

(more…)

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Maritime Security: US Navy Using ‘Q-Ships’ And Somalis Guilty Of Piracy In Historic Trial

     Three men jumped from a command boat into an open skiff and raced toward the target. They opened fire with AK-47 rifles as they neared the starboard side, hitting a mast and several life lines.

     No one was hurt, and the April 1 incident normally might have drawn little notice. Somali sea bandits have attacked several hundred freighters, tankers and other merchant ships this year. They have successfully hijacked 40 vessels and their crews and held them for ransom.

     But the target this time was the U.S. guided missile frigate Nicholas, disguised to resemble a cargo ship. Navy gunners fired back, and by dawn, commandos had captured five Somalis.

     The last known U.S. trial of a pirate captured overseas was in 1819. During the Civil War, crew members from the Savannah, a Confederate raider, were charged with piracy and tried in New York. But the jury deadlocked, and the rebels later were deemed prisoners of war. 

    There is actually two historic events here.  The first would be the trial itself, but the second would be the first use of ‘Q-ships‘ by the US Navy since World War 2. This last part is incredibly under reported, and hopefully some clarification can be made by the US Navy about this if it is true.

    Or maybe there was a mistake by the reporter below, or this is what the defense claimed in the trial?  Who knows, but it certainly is interesting if true.  It almost makes me wonder if the USS Ashland was set up to be a decoy as well, because Somali pirates fired on that vessel thinking it was a merchant vessel. –Matt

US jury finds Somalis guilty of piracy

November 25, 2010

WASHINGTON — Five Somalis were found guilty of piracy for attacking a US vessel in the Indian Ocean, the first US convictions on such charges in nearly two centuries, the Department of Justice said Wednesday.

A jury in the port city of Norfolk, Virginia found the men guilty of the April attack on the navy frigate USS Nicholas — which they mistook for a merchant vessel — from a small skiff in April.

The ruling marks “what is believed to be the first piracy trial conviction in the United States since 1820,” the US Department of Justice said in a statement.

According to trial testimony, the men sailed from Somalia searching for a merchant ship to raid. “They used a larger ship full of supplies, along with two smaller vessels loaded with assault weapons and a rocket propelled grenade (RPG) that served as attack boats,” the statement read.

On April 1, three of the suspects boarded one of the smaller vessels “and set out to pirate what they believed to be a merchant ship.”

The men opened fire on a ship which turned out to be the Norfolk-based USS Nicholas.

(more…)

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Company Spotlight: Drum Cussac

     Drum Cussac deserves a little attention here, and I would like to thank Marcel at the Feral Jundi Facebook Page for sending me some recent information about them. I have posted a job deal from Drum Cussac in the past, and interestingly enough, it was for some FCO work. I say this because in the article below, it is yet again the FCO wanting to work with Drum Cussac for a contract training the TFG coast guard in Somalia to battle pirates.  I guess the FCO likes working with Drum Cussac, and that is why I wanted to do a company spotlight on them.

     Oh, and the dorks at the Telegraph should really think before getting all pissed off about their government hiring ‘mercenaries’ and using tax payer’s money for contracting their services. What the article forgets to emphasize (yet still mentions) is that the money the FCO would use for contracting Drum Cussac’s services, would be the $25 million dollars in so-called ‘aid money’ given to them by the US.  So I am not sure how this would be construed as taking from the British tax payer? Hell, if anything, US money for anti-piracy operations should go towards contracting the services of US companies.

     But back to Drum Cussac.  I found a few interesting things about the company worth noting, but there are also some areas that I am foggy about. For example, there is no history section on the company’s website that discusses where the name ‘Drum Cussac’ came from?  There really isn’t any information about the leadership of the company on the website either, but I did find out who the CEO of Drum Cussac is via other means. He is former Scots Guards officer Jeremy Stampa Orwin.

    As for the business that Drum has done, as of 2008 they had over 130 super-yachts as clients, with each boat worth more than £50 million. Not bad, and it sounds like recently they have done a lot to corner the super yacht market with their partnership with Yacht Lifeline. I am sure business has increased since that time, and their other shipping protection work, as well as the oil and gas stuff has made them a pretty penny. They also mentioned ‘500 transits’ in high risk waters over the last five years, so that is something.

    I was really interested when they started promoting ‘armed security’ in a press release, and the Telegraph story took an interest as well. For a British company, promoting maritime armed security is a rarity it seems. lol But it is a sign of the times that armed security is what is probably being demanded now a days. Especially as each ransom paid continues to add to the lethality and size of the piracy problem.  Perhaps shipping companies are starting to get the idea that something needs to be done, other than fueling the problem with more money.

    The other area of interest was their Political Evacuation Insurance they offer.  I am wondering if this insurance would cover a situation like what happened to Ross Perot’s company in Iran? I would be very curious to know how far a company like this would go to save a client?

    Finally, I have posted a link to probably one of the best Maritime Security forums out there, located at Close Protection World’s family of forums.  They have tons of information about the SSO certification for maritime security work, and they discuss Drum Cussac from time to time. Especially this current news story about them.

     From what I gather, Drum offers a pretty good SSO course for a reasonable price.  I have yet to hear any complaints and they sound comparable to other companies offering the same. No word on wether or not you could get on some database after getting this training, but I am sure they would offer some kind of networking potential or even recruitment offers via email every once in awhile.

     Although it sounds like this current gig offering £1,500-a-day would only be reserved for their high-end guys. But you never know, and they do cover a lot of boats out there, so the work has to be there.  Definitely check out all the stuff below and if anyone has anything else to add about the company, please feel free to chime in. –Matt

Armed Security Teams

October 2010

Drum Cussac, the market leader in anti-piracy and maritime security consultancy, can now supply a full range of armed services for the protection of vessels in transit through high risk waters and for static operations or survey work in areas of high threat.

Our armed option has been designed to provide fully legitimate, properly licensed and trained teams to deploy onboard vessels. Our teams are experienced UK Nationals and are equipped with new and modern weapon systems. We are able to operate from a number of ports in the Indian sub-continent, Africa, Gulf States and the Mediterranean.

(more…)

Sunday, November 14, 2010

History: The Gunner And The U-Boat, By Hugh Perkins

     To the victor the spoils. There was an immediate cash gratuity to be shared among Inverlyon’s reservist crew members. All hands were also eligible for Admiralty bounty money, but that would not be forthcoming until April 1923*. Gunner Jehan was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, a well-deserved accolade for a surprisingly successful action in which a lot of nerve, nine rounds of 3-pounder and a few dozen rounds of small arms ammunition sank a U-boat. The Admiralty also singled out the actions and steadiness of the gun’s crew and Skipper Philip’s attempt to rescue the German submariner.

     This is a great little story about a Q-ship versus a U-boat during World War One. It would take a lot of nerve for the captain of a scamp (see below) to take on a submarine. Especially the type that had sunk so many British and Allied vessels during that war.

    The concept of the Q-ship was developed during this war and it was referenced here on the blog as a possible strategy to use against today’s pirates. Imagine a bunch of modern day yachts, cruising around the gulf with some Barrett’s and RPG’s just looking for trouble? lol

    I also wanted to highlight how this Q-ship crew was used for warfare. They were all brought into the Royal Navy auxiliary as volunteers, and they were paid with ‘immediate cash gratuity’ and with Admiralty (Navy command) bounties for every German U-boat crew member killed. (£5 per crewman on a submarine) Hmmm, paying bounties for killing the enemy–now that doesn’t get much attention for that war.

    The really funny part about this story was the fact that after this little sailboat sank the U-boat, the submarine actually got hung up in the fishing net they had been pulling behind them. Talk about a big fish? lol

     Boy, if any movie folks out there are looking for a cool story, this would make for a great short film. It truly is a modern day version of David and Goliath and high seas bounty hunting. –Matt

 

This is what a ‘smack’ would have looked like during that time.

The Gunner and the U-Boat

September 2008

By Hugh Perkins

A lone gunner on a small trawler dueled a German U-boat to the finish in a David and Goliath-type contest

The story of the U-boat war against Allied merchant shipping during The Great War is one of enormous tragedy, incredible human suffering, sacrifice and bravery, Destruction of lives and ships on such a massive scale and by such an unusual means had never before happened in the history of the seafaring world. Once the potential inherent in the U-boats had been tested, the German Admiral staff did its utmost to isolate Great Britain from outside support, first with a U-boat blockade of the British Isles and later, through the wholesale destruction of her sea-borne trade on the high seas far from war-torn Europe. The German objective was to bring Britannia to her knees through starvation thus putting an end to the war on German terms. They came alarmingly close to succeeding.

During 1915, when the U-boat force began its first concerted campaign and shipping losses started to rise, the Royal Navy found itself completely unprepared to deal with the submersible marauders. Both the Admiralty and the mercantile community cast about for solutions to the problem.

Convoy, a defensive tactic that had been employed with success in sailing ship days, was not favored by either group. The Admiralty did not have the escort ships and the steamship captains did not want to give up their independence. Other means of protecting the merchant fleet were sought.

The first countermeasure to be tried was the containment of the U-boats using mine fields, nets and patrols. This was continued throughout the course of the war and ultimately mines destroyed more U-boats than any other single means. Another idea, and that best liked by the mercantile community, was to arm merchant ships so that by a combination of speed, maneuvering and gunfire they could fight it out with their adversaries.

This worked fairly well for the large, fast, modern ships when the U-boat cooperated by surfacing first, and many a steamer was actually saved by these tactics. Mounting a gun on a merchantman, however, had its drawbacks for it gave the U-boat captain the excuse he needed to sink the ship without warning. For the multitude of slow steamers, older ships and sailing vessels there was no real safety and they paid heavily. The best that could be done was to provide them with wireless sets so that ships in distress could at least call for help within the limited range of the early instruments.

Another solution was the creation of the now-famous Q-ships, an assortment of converted merchant vessels and small warships built to resemble merchant ships, manned by Naval crews and armed with concealed guns, depth charges and even torpedo tubes. These ships plied the trade routes like any other innocent merchantmen, sometimes under neutral colors, in the hopes of being challenged by German submarines, much like bait in a mobile trap. When a U-boat’s periscope was sighted, or one surfaced nearby and ordered them to heave-to, a “panic party” dressed as merchant seamen would tumble into the lifeboats and abandon ship while the gun crews stayed under cover at their hidden guns. Once the U-boat came within easy range, the white ensign was run up, the shields were dropped and the guns opened fire to destroy the submarine before it could dive out of danger.

At least, that was the idea. Sometimes it worked very well, sometimes not. Occasionally the Uboat would torpedo the Q-ship without ever revealing herself. On a number of occasions, better armed German submarines stood-off and shelled the Q-ship either forcing her to open fire prematurely to save herself or reducing the “trapship” to a sinking condition before she could bring her guns into action. There were some very lively actions between decoy ships and submarines with casualties aplenty on both sides.

Q-ships came in all shapes and sizes but one of the earliest, and most humble, must have been the converted fishing vessel known as His Majesty’s Armed Smack Inverlyon. She was based at Lowestoft on the Suffolk coast. Like dozens of her ilk, Inverlyon was a bluff-bowed, flushdecked, two-masted, fore-and-aft rigged, little vessel sporting a stubby bowsprit. She had no engine and relied entirely on a suit of patched, broom, canvas sails and the skill of her crew for mobility. For armament, Inverlyon was fitted with a single 3pounder (47mm) quick-firer, a popgun by anybody’s standards but about all that could be carried in such a small vessel.

(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…)

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress