Somali pirates take a ship full of T-72 tanks

[John Kettler]

Here's the latest.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-af-somalia-piracy,0,7784336.story

As I note in the similar thread on the GDF, the Russians have announced they're going to do unilateral pirate patrols. If so, any pirate given the opportunity to surrender to such a unit should take it. The Russians don't mess around. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the warlords responsible started receiving pieces of relatives as an incentive to stop and a warning that the pieces would get ever closer to themselves. This solved a kidnapping problem in Lebanon far more elegantly than our battleship bombardment did and got no Russian buildings blown up, either, let alone with hundreds inside.

Regards,

John Kettler

[John Kettler]

Here's a new Somali pirate story, one illustrating an unexpected downside to the "trade."

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2008/09/28/mystery-cargo-somali-pirates-dying-aboard-hijacked-iranian-ship/

Seems an Iranian vessel was seized, but something aboard, originating in Nanjing, China, is wreaking havoc on the pirates, with several dead and others sick. Whether it's chemical munitions, radioactive waste (hair reported falling out = classic radiation exposure indicator) or something else, a) it's very nasty and a whole lot of lying is going on by the parties involved. I refer you to the Borges dictum: "No rumor should be considered true until officially denied."

Regards,

John Kettler

[Bigduke6]

cabal123,

Trust me, the news doesn't have to tell you the truth, it's just that we like to believe it because it is the primary source of info for those of you not screening top secret messages coming across teletypes and military communications.

And since when are the secret messages coming across the teletypes and military communications inherently reliable? Or the truth?

I don't have any Gulf of Aden stories but here's one on secret military reports: During the recent Russo-Georgian war more than one western military attache gathered information by interviewing garden-variety news reporters that had been places he hadn't, this because basically the military attaches' bosses were more worried about their people getting hurt, than the reporters' bosses.

So what the reporters told the military attaches became secret intelligence transmitted by super-codes back to the home country where the big cheeses could read it and feel cool because of their great security clearances, while the reporters just filed their stories and photographs.

Intelligence is only as good as the source, and how good the source is at getting the information you want to know. Making it secret doesn't make it better. Sometimes the government has better information than the media. Sometimes it doesn't.

Moving right along, here's the latest multiple-source suitable for the hoi polloi, it seems the pirates know all about fighting over booty. Maybe they'll bury their hostages on an island and make a treasure map, we can only hope!

Official: Three Somali pirates shot dead in tank ship feud

Eds: Includes confirmation by NGO official =

Nairobi/Kiev (dpa) - The presence of international warships has

provoked a gunbattle that led to three Somali pirates being shot dead

aboard a hijacked Ukrainian cargo ship carrying tanks, a maritime

official said Tuesday.

"There was a shootout because of a misunderstanding between the

gunmen," Andrew Mwangura of the East African Seafarers‘ Assistance

Programme told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

"They are paranoid about the presence of (international)

warships," said Mwangura, whose Kenya-based organization monitors

acts of piracy off Somalia.

"Some of them want to bail out or abandon the mission and others

are ready to continue," he added.

None of the 20 crewmembers being held along with the ship were

believed to have been injured in the fighting.

The MV Faina, along with its cargo of 33 T-72 tanks, armoured

personnel carriers and munitions, was seized late Thursday as it

headed for the Kenyan port of Mombasa.

The ship, with an estimated 50 pirates onboard, is now surrounded

by warships at its anchorage point off the Somali coast near the port

of Hobyo.

Lieutenant Nathan Christensen, deputy spokesman for the US Navy‘s

fifth fleet, said that three warships, amongst them the USS Howard,

were maintaining visual contact and that there were no plans to

launch an assault on the hijacked vessel.

One of the other ships is believed to be Russian and the identity

of the third is unknown. A US helicopter gunship is also monitoring

the pirates.

The major response is due to fears that the military cargo may

fall into the hands of Islamists currently waging a bloody insurgency

against the transitional federal government in Somalia.

A pirate spokesman said any international attempt at military

action to free the hostages would result in their death.

"If any warships attack, nobody on the ship will live: either we

will all survive or we will all die," Sugale Ali, a spokesman for the

pirates, told dpa by satellite phone on Monday.

The pirates have demanded a ransom of 20 million dollars to

release the cargo ship and its crew.

Seventeen Ukrainians, two Russians, and one Latvian were being

held hostage aboard the Faina.

A third Russian, the ship‘s former captain Vladimir Kolobkov, died

on Sunday, the ship‘s deputy captain Viktor Nikolsky told dpa.

There has also been confusion over the final destination of the

military cargo.

Kenyan government spokesman Alfred Mutua insists the equipment is

for use by the Kenyan military, but the US Navy, the pirates and

other officials say the equipment is destined for South Sudan.

"According to my information, the shipment is going to south

Sudan," Mwangura said. "This is the fourth or fifth such shipment to

come through Kenya."

North and South Sudan have maintained a fragile peace since 2005,

although recent tensions in the town of Abyei brought the two sides

close to war again.

Should the shipment prove to be headed for South Sudan, the

prospects for long-term peace could be dealt another blow.

Ukrainian government officials have said the shipment was a

legitimate state-to-state arms delivery from Ukraine to Kenya.

Piracy is rife in the Gulf of Aden - a strategic shipping route

off Somalia - with around a dozen ships currently in the hands of

armed groups, the latest victim being a Greek vessel seized Saturday.

Two other pirated vessels, MV Capt Stefanos and MV Centauri, are

also anchored in the same location as the Ukrainian ship, the US Navy

said.

However, pirates have over the past few days released three ships

- Japanese vessel the MV Stella Maris and Malaysian tankers the MT

Bunga Melati 2 and the MT Bunga Melati 5 and - although ransoms of

several million dollars are believed to have been paid.

dpa ml sbk mga 301054 GMT Sep 08

The thing I love about this story is that the pirates have a press spokesman. (Who, a colleague tells me, is a well-spoken and urbane sort of fellow.)

Other comments:

1. It's not clear if the Russians have a ship on station or not, last I heard they were sending a frigate from the Baltic.

2. I wasn't aware of this but in early September the French tracked down and took into custody 6 of about 12 pirates who had grabbed one of these luxury sailing ships, and now you can see vids on Youtune of the poor pirates getting surrounded by French Force Especiale troppers and Alouette helicopters in the Somali desert.

3. I correct my earlier estimate the boats that the pirates used against the Ukrainian cargo ship, pictures show they were motorboats in the 2-3 meter range.

4. I assume the reason the cargo ship companies don't do the logical thing and just mount a .50 on all four quarters of the ship is insurance and the cost of keeping the guns crewed; a manned MG of any kind would convert these pirate speedboats into hamburger carriers in a minute or less.

5. The Ukrainian cargo ship also seems to have depleted uranium shells for the T-72s; so sooner or later every one is going to go beserk about the alleged and very silly environmental hazard, even if they could care less about the lives of the crew.

[SgtMuhammed]

"1. It's not clear if the Russians have a ship on station or not, last I heard they were sending a frigate from the Baltic."

That was the last thing I heard as well. If it is already on station it must have been pretty close to start with.

"2. I wasn't aware of this but in early September the French tracked down and took into custody 6 of about 12 pirates who had grabbed one of these luxury sailing ships, and now you can see vids on Youtune of the poor pirates getting surrounded by French Force Especiale troppers and Alouette helicopters in the Somali desert."

Was not aware of this either.

"3. I correct my earlier estimate the boats that the pirates used against the Ukrainian cargo ship, pictures show they were motorboats in the 2-3 meter range.

4. I assume the reason the cargo ship companies don't do the logical thing and just mount a .50 on all four quarters of the ship is insurance and the cost of keeping the guns crewed; a manned MG of any kind would convert these pirate speedboats into hamburger carriers in a minute or less."

Shoot, even a couple half way competent marksmen with high powered rifles would make these ships nearly invulnerable to these scumbags.

"5. The Ukrainian cargo ship also seems to have depleted uranium shells for the T-72s; so sooner or later every one is going to go beserk about the alleged and very silly environmental hazard, even if they could care less about the lives of the crew."

Everyone knows that if you dump a body into the ocean it is just fish food but if a particle of DU touches the water you will poison the entire Southern hemisphere.

[ChrisND]

Everyone knows that if you dump a body into the ocean it is just fish food but if a particle of DU touches the water you will poison the entire Southern hemisphere.

I hear they accelerate global warming as well.

[Pig Dog]

Stuck in a port in Somalia eh? Why do I get the feeling that very soon I'm going to get an email something like below?

DEAR SIR,

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL

HAVING CONSULTED WITH MY COLLEAGUES AND BASED ON THE INFORMATION GATHERED FROM THE NIGERIAN CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, WE HAVE COME INTO POSSESSION OF SEVERAL SLIGHTLY USED RUSSIAN T-72 TANKS.

WE ARE OF KNOWING THAT YOU HAVE AN INTEREST IN SUCH A VEHICLE AND WOULD LIKE TO OFFER YOU IT ONE OR SEVERAL AND THEREFORE THIS MAIL HAS BEEN SENT TO YOU.

THIS ARE HIGH QUALITY RUSSIAN MANUFACTURE WITH ONLY SLIGHT WEAR AND TEAR AND A FEW SCRATCHES MADE BY BULLETS AND OTHER SMALL ARMS. WE ARE ASKING $200,000 IN U.S. DOLLARS FOR EACH OF THESE HISTORIC VEHICLES.

IT IS IMPORTANT TO INFORM YOU THAT AS CIVIL SERVANTS, WE ARE FORBIDDEN TO OWN OR SELL SUCH MERCHANDISE; THAT IS WHY WE REQUIRE YOUR ASSISTANCE. WE HAVE AN INTERNATIONAL ACCOUNT FOR YOU TO TRANSFER THE MONEY TO SO THAT WE WILL NOT BE IN BREAK OF LAW. THERE WILL BE A 5% FEE FOR LOCAL AND INTERNATIONAL EXPENSES INCIDENT TO THE TRANSFER.

THE TRANSFER IS RISK FREE ON BOTH SIDES. I AM AN ACCOUNTANT WITH THE NIGERIAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION (NNPC). IF YOU FIND THIS PROPOSAL ACCEPTABLE, WE SHALL REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS:

(A) YOUR BANKER'S NAME, TELEPHONE, ACCOUNT AND FAX NUMBERS.

( YOUR PRIVATE TELEPHONE AND FAX NUMBERS -- FOR CONFIDENTIALITY AND EASY COMMUNICATION.

© YOUR LETTER-HEADED PAPER STAMPED AND SIGNED.

ALTERNATIVELY WE WILL FURNISH YOU WITH THE TEXT OF WHAT TO TYPE INTO YOUR LETTER-HEADED PAPER, ALONG WITH A BREAKDOWN EXPLAINING, COMPREHENSIVELY WHAT WE REQUIRE OF YOU. THE BUSINESS WILL TAKE US THIRTY (30) WORKING DAYS TO ACCOMPLISH.

PLEASE REPLY URGENTLY.

BEST REGARDS

-------

Reply From <xxx@xxx>

DEAR SIR,

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TRANSFER OF THE MONIES TO PURCHASE YOUR T-72 TANK. UNFORTUNATELY WE ARE UNABLE TO SEND IT AT THIS TIME, AS THE SHIP CONTAINING THE TANKS HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY DELAYED IN PORT IN PORT IN HOBYO, SOMALIA. APPARENTLY THE RUSSIANS AND AMERICANS ARE NOT WANTING TO LET OUR COMRADES TRANSFER THE ITEMS OFF OF THE SHIP THAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY ON.

DUE TO THIS UNFORSEEN CIRCUMSTANCE, WE ARE REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL $10,000 IN U.S. FUNDS THAT WE MAY USE TO BRIBE CUSTOMS AGENTS AND OTHER OFFICIALS AND RETRIEVE YOUR PURCHASE FOR YOU.

IF YOU FIND THIS PROPOSAL ACCEPTABLE, WE SHALL REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS:

(A) YOUR BANKER'S NAME, TELEPHONE, ACCOUNT AND FAX NUMBERS.

( YOUR PRIVATE TELEPHONE AND FAX NUMBERS -- FOR CONFIDENTIALITY AND EASY COMMUNICATION.

© YOUR LETTER-HEADED PAPER STAMPED AND SIGNED.

ALTERNATIVELY WE WILL FURNISH YOU WITH THE TEXT OF WHAT TO TYPE INTO YOUR LETTER-HEADED PAPER, ALONG WITH A BREAKDOWN EXPLAINING, COMPREHENSIVELY WHAT WE REQUIRE OF YOU. THE BUSINESS WILL TAKE US THIRTY (30) WORKING DAYS TO ACCOMPLISH.

PLEASE REPLY URGENTLY.

BEST REGARDS

[Abbott]

DEAR SIR,

CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS PROPOSAL

LOL! .

[cabal23]

cabal123,

And since when are the secret messages coming across the teletypes and military communications inherently reliable? Or the truth?

I don't have any Gulf of Aden stories but here's one on secret military reports: During the recent Russo-Georgian war more than one western military attache gathered information by interviewing garden-variety news reporters that had been places he hadn't, this because basically the military attaches' bosses were more worried about their people getting hurt, than the reporters' bosses.

So what the reporters told the military attaches became secret intelligence transmitted by super-codes back to the home country where the big cheeses could read it and feel cool because of their great security clearances, while the reporters just filed their stories and photographs.

Intelligence is only as good as the source, and how good the source is at getting the information you want to know. Making it secret doesn't make it better. Sometimes the government has better information than the media. Sometimes it doesn't.

Moving right along, here's the latest multiple-source suitable for the hoi polloi, it seems the pirates know all about fighting over booty. Maybe they'll bury their hostages on an island and make a treasure map, we can only hope!

Official: Three Somali pirates shot dead in tank ship feud

Eds: Includes confirmation by NGO official =

Nairobi/Kiev (dpa) - The presence of international warships has

provoked a gunbattle that led to three Somali pirates being shot dead

aboard a hijacked Ukrainian cargo ship carrying tanks, a maritime

official said Tuesday.

"There was a shootout because of a misunderstanding between the

gunmen," Andrew Mwangura of the East African Seafarers‘ Assistance

Programme told Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa.

"They are paranoid about the presence of (international)

warships," said Mwangura, whose Kenya-based organization monitors

acts of piracy off Somalia.

"Some of them want to bail out or abandon the mission and others

are ready to continue," he added.

None of the 20 crewmembers being held along with the ship were

believed to have been injured in the fighting.

The MV Faina, along with its cargo of 33 T-72 tanks, armoured

personnel carriers and munitions, was seized late Thursday as it

headed for the Kenyan port of Mombasa.

The ship, with an estimated 50 pirates onboard, is now surrounded

by warships at its anchorage point off the Somali coast near the port

of Hobyo.

Lieutenant Nathan Christensen, deputy spokesman for the US Navy‘s

fifth fleet, said that three warships, amongst them the USS Howard,

were maintaining visual contact and that there were no plans to

launch an assault on the hijacked vessel.

One of the other ships is believed to be Russian and the identity

of the third is unknown. A US helicopter gunship is also monitoring

the pirates.

The major response is due to fears that the military cargo may

fall into the hands of Islamists currently waging a bloody insurgency

against the transitional federal government in Somalia.

A pirate spokesman said any international attempt at military

action to free the hostages would result in their death.

"If any warships attack, nobody on the ship will live: either we

will all survive or we will all die," Sugale Ali, a spokesman for the

pirates, told dpa by satellite phone on Monday.

The pirates have demanded a ransom of 20 million dollars to

release the cargo ship and its crew.

Seventeen Ukrainians, two Russians, and one Latvian were being

held hostage aboard the Faina.

A third Russian, the ship‘s former captain Vladimir Kolobkov, died

on Sunday, the ship‘s deputy captain Viktor Nikolsky told dpa.

There has also been confusion over the final destination of the

military cargo.

Kenyan government spokesman Alfred Mutua insists the equipment is

for use by the Kenyan military, but the US Navy, the pirates and

other officials say the equipment is destined for South Sudan.

"According to my information, the shipment is going to south

Sudan," Mwangura said. "This is the fourth or fifth such shipment to

come through Kenya."

North and South Sudan have maintained a fragile peace since 2005,

although recent tensions in the town of Abyei brought the two sides

close to war again.

Should the shipment prove to be headed for South Sudan, the

prospects for long-term peace could be dealt another blow.

Ukrainian government officials have said the shipment was a

legitimate state-to-state arms delivery from Ukraine to Kenya.

Piracy is rife in the Gulf of Aden - a strategic shipping route

off Somalia - with around a dozen ships currently in the hands of

armed groups, the latest victim being a Greek vessel seized Saturday.

Two other pirated vessels, MV Capt Stefanos and MV Centauri, are

also anchored in the same location as the Ukrainian ship, the US Navy

said.

However, pirates have over the past few days released three ships

- Japanese vessel the MV Stella Maris and Malaysian tankers the MT

Bunga Melati 2 and the MT Bunga Melati 5 and - although ransoms of

several million dollars are believed to have been paid.

dpa ml sbk mga 301054 GMT Sep 08

The thing I love about this story is that the pirates have a press spokesman. (Who, a colleague tells me, is a well-spoken and urbane sort of fellow.)

Other comments:

1. It's not clear if the Russians have a ship on station or not, last I heard they were sending a frigate from the Baltic.

2. I wasn't aware of this but in early September the French tracked down and took into custody 6 of about 12 pirates who had grabbed one of these luxury sailing ships, and now you can see vids on Youtune of the poor pirates getting surrounded by French Force Especiale troppers and Alouette helicopters in the Somali desert.

3. I correct my earlier estimate the boats that the pirates used against the Ukrainian cargo ship, pictures show they were motorboats in the 2-3 meter range.

4. I assume the reason the cargo ship companies don't do the logical thing and just mount a .50 on all four quarters of the ship is insurance and the cost of keeping the guns crewed; a manned MG of any kind would convert these pirate speedboats into hamburger carriers in a minute or less.

5. The Ukrainian cargo ship also seems to have depleted uranium shells for the T-72s; so sooner or later every one is going to go beserk about the alleged and very silly environmental hazard, even if they could care less about the lives of the crew.

I wasn't at all stating the military info is always correct(that is actually funny as anyone who served can testify to), just that how do any of know what is going on, unless we are in comms with someone on the USS Howard? I am sure the military has a much better idea and the real story is most likely being kept secret. It's funny how in this thread alone there are conflicting reports. Not to mention the pirates are refuting what is happening.

The things I saw coming across my desk while I was serving as a Task Group Operator certainly weren't speculative. What I saw being reported on the news, and what we were reviewing were not always in line with each other. Not disagreeing that news sources do sometimes have info, but my personal experiences showed me that the military intel we received on a daily basis was usually on the mark in accordance with world events. This was info being shared with all the admirals on down to the captains of ships. For some of us it was central to our missions wherever we were in the world. I have seen this all before. If this wasn't a US interest, then why is the USS Howard there when we haven't meddled in Somalian piracy affairs before? I was just making the point that this bigger than the news is reporting. Maybe I am wrong because I no longer have an insiders view. It's my Spidey sense working overtime I guess.

[Battlefront.com]

There's no chance that this ship will make port, IMHO. Before it gets a chance to do that it will be either disabled (preferable) or sunk (undesirable). I wouldn't be at all surprised to know that some SEAL team already has a remote explosive device stuck to the rudder, or at least that's a plan being worked on. Those guys train for situations like this.

Steve

[theFightingSeabee]

A little det cord wrapped around the screw and it's a rowboat. A chapter right out of a Richard Marcinko book. I should know, I had orders to BUD/S for about 6 weeks .

"Come down to crazy Steve's used tank lot! Just look at this 1973 T-72 with only 23 miles on it! 0.1 miles per gallon and 0.2 on the highway! Never, EVER, get stuck in traffic again! Only $150,000! Get yours today!"

- cue the pet elephant and the oversized cowboy hat -

http://www.paintball-guns.tv/images/paintball_mini_tank.jpg

[Seanachai]

This is what would happen if Dalem were my Secretary of Defense. We'd simply go in their, sink all those stinking little tubs, hose the pirates off the freighter with mini-guns, and, where necessary send 'letters of condolence' to the families of any of the original crew that kacks during 'Operation No More Negotiations with Pirates'. A good possible follow-up would be an official letter to the ship owners letting them know that in the future the US Navy would be paying a great deal of attention to their ships, cargoes and destinations, with quite possibly a diplomatic note to the Ukrainian government suggesting that NATO membership would be a lot easier if their government discouraged selling weapons to troubled African governments, especially where their seemed to be little concern over where, in fact, those weapons might ultimately end up.

And if the slavs want to whinge about damage to their boat or the loss of any of its crew, they could be politely told to talk to their government about the inherent dangers of shipping arms to Third World hellholes, and if the Ukrainian government wants to get fussy, we could suggest that next time they pull their own navy out of the Black Sea and send them to haul out their own trash.

Ridiculous. Businesses and Governments negotiating with scum. The Malaysians just payed off Somali pirates to recover one of their tankers. There's no economic incentive if there's no surviving bad guys. Collateral damage? Chalk it up to 'forced consciousness expansion' for those who want to dabble in international weapons sales.

Great opportunity if you want to draw a 'line across the waves'. It's not like it's a ship loaded with humanitarian aid workers and refugee supplies. Sends the message: Seize a ship, and get prepared to appear before Allah with your head in your hands, a sheepish grin, and the knowledge that three score and ten plus virgins are going to be laughing at you for being too stupid to pour piss out of your own boot.

Historically one of the purposes of a peacetime navy is to put a stop to things like piracy. Someone at the back of the crowd simply needs to shout 'They're al-Qaida agents!', and then we can get down to hosing the blood out of the scuppers...

[Seanachai]

It is of interest to note that, for the first time since the late 16th and early 17th centuries, Piracy is once again a very going concern. The area around Indonesia is rife with it, and the Indian Ocean off the African coast is lagging only a little behind.

Sadly, modern Big Power navies are all about 'projecting power', and tasked with holding themselves in readiness against the need to make a showing against national enemies. They cost even major powers fortunes to maintain and service, and apparently can't be wasted in anything so mundane as 'policing the seas'. Add to that the tangles of International maritime law, 'National' as opposed to 'International' waters, and the welter of competing claims of sovereignty and responsibility, not to mention corruption and political agendas, makes the situation a hydra-headed freak show that allows these vicious bastards to ply their trade with all but impunity.

The result is that nations, like our own, with a powerful naval presence in many parts of the world, can pretty much guarantee that their shipping isn't going to be screwed with. Everyone else takes their chances, or exerts their will to the extant they can. Which, in many cases in troubled waters, isn't very far.

And the modern pirates operate out of bases in nations that can't even tie their own goddamn shoes, let alone protect anyone sailing near by.

So we get big news stories like this one. Which is only a big story because the sorry idjits involved decided to grab a freighter loaded with weapons, thereby guaranteeing that they'd caught their cocks in their zipper, because a major power isn't about to let them off-load and sell the dicey arms shipment they'd seized to anyone that might be too annoying.

As of this morning, they were 'celebrating a Moslem holiday' by shooting those who realized the only negotiation they needed to make was escaping with their worthless little lives.

Eventually the main band will decide to cut their losses and surrender with the understanding that they will be 'repatriated to their own nation for punishment'.

That means they'll probably lose their boats, and have to buy them back later from whatever Somali authority gets the contract to resell them their boats. And their weapons will be replaced in the nearest marketplace.

As far as they're concerned, this was just the Third World equivalent of a failed 'unfriendly corporate takeover'.

On the plus side for America, it's unlikely that this will have a negative effect on any decision regarding 'Dancing With the Stars'.

[cabal23]

Priceless Seanachai........

[Bigduke6]

Yep. It's all about the money.

The ship and cargo owners sending stuff past the Somali coast aren't doing it for fun, but (obviously) because it's profitable. Part of the costs that they have to deal with, in order to get a profit, is ship and crew insurance. Another is crew salaries, another is ship operating costs, and still another is of course the cost of the ship.

If pirates were harming the bottom line, there would have been gun crews aboard cargo ships passing the Horn of Somalia months ago. But that pushes up ship insurance fees, crew rates, insurance for them , and operating costs since you have to sail further asea, at higher speeds, or I dunno even zigzag. That's extra diesel down the drain, and did I mention fuel costs are at world record highs? Security costs money, and these days, if you try and buy some you get gouged in the process. And of course the pirates aren't grabbing every ship that goes by.

So, in the present case, what does the ship owner/cargo owner (I'm lumping them together here for ease of doing the math) stand to lose if he pretends sailing past Somalia is cheap, and one of his ships gets grabbed? The cargo, say that's maybe 50 million dollars. The ship and all the stuff in it, that's maybe 10 million dollars. His profit, and if I know the shipping industry it's not marginal, minimumy 2 - 3 million dollars for the run, given corruption along the line it could be as much as 10 million. Then there's whatever blood money some one would have to pay the sailors' families, not much as they're FSU sailors, so figure 100 grand per body or 2 million bucks all told. If they stay alive for a while you have to keep paying them while they're hostage, and probably the whole crew together costs maybe 50,000 bucks a month base, plus now hardship fees and penalties to the crewing companies that have booked the sailors jobs elsewhere. And of course there is the unplanned travel from someplace obscure and expensive once the crew is freed. It adds up fast. So, rough potential loss, some one is going to get hit for about a 60 - 70 million dollar bite, minimum and it could be alot more, if somehow this ship and its cargo goes under the water.

The ransom meanwhile currently is, what, 30 million dollars? This no doubt can get haggled down to about half that. Maybe less. Of course the pirates are going the deal, no one is expected to pay the first non-negotiable demand. So one easy way out is pay the ransom, spread it out among the responsible parties, and basically every makes a profit, just a smaller one than before.

One alternative is of course sending the US Navy into harm's way, which as Senechai pointed out sounds good until you do the numbers.

After all, one of these little bitty US destroyers costs 750 million dollars at minimum, and probably 1.5 billion dollars once you add in all the latest gear and gee-whiz electronics and helicopters and guided munitions and exercise bikes for the Seals if you have them aboard and the designated duty slot for an Affermative Action officer. And as we know all that expensive stuff is not invulnerable, why, a nutso Islamic suicide dude in a motor boat loaded with explosives could really do a number on a Burke-class destroyer.

And surprise, the Somali pirates have motor boats, they are Islamic, and I think it is reasonable to assume they have working links with fanatics willing to drive a motor boat into a billion-dollar Infidel destroyer. Just the loss of one of the helicopters off the Burke, once you throw in weapons and avionics and air crew, is a significant chunk of the total ransom being demanded.

So, the Burke destroyer can't do much all by itself, it needs help. Well, already there is an Aegis class guided missile cruiser on the scene, and apparently a couple of European frigates as well. Neptune alone knows how much all that floating hardware costs, but just for fun figure the number is now up to 3 - 4 billion dollars. Not that they can do much hunting down pirates, four ships can't even escort the stream of cargo ships moving between the Red Sea, the Subcontinent, and the Cape. Not even if there were convoys - the distance is too big and the volume of cargo ships has to be (I'm guessing here, but I'm sure it must be a dozen cargo ships going past Puntland every 24 hours, and that's just the pointy bit of Somalia) - for four warships to handle.

It would be nice to have the ground forces and will to make Somalia peaceful, but you don't. So you need even more ships, and let's not forget the cost of operating them, with their spiffy engines and crews that get retirement and decent salaries even before the "combat" pay and P/X priviledges and all that good stuff. So even if you don't lose a single warship, not a single sailor, if you go hunting for pirates or even just patrol in the area hoping you might protect a cargo ship or two, you are talking about millions of dollars a week just to try.

Now, recall the demanded ransom: 20 or 30 million dollars, or whatever it is. Now recall that the ships the pirates have grabbed, pretty much without exception, have no commercial link with the countries that own the warships. The pirates generally aren't dumb, and as I noted earlier the French of all people made clear pirates screw with First World shipping at their own risk: In early September Somali pirates grabbed this French luxury sailing ship, and within two week the French special forces had taken about a half dozen of the pirates into custody. Countries like Ukraine on the other hand don't have a navy, instead they have the assurances from countries like the US that the US is for the freedom of the seas, which is why the US has this great big navy in the first place.

But when the American navy guys start doing the math, they have to ask themselves, how much does Freedom of the Seas mean when you balance it up against billions of dollars of risked US military hardware and personnel, never mind operating costs, and when the easy way out is a measly 20 million bucks?

Now, factor into the equation that the decision-makers are not Horatio Hornblower or Lord Howe or Chester Nimitz, but rather the leadership of the US Navy, the service least involved in the present US wars, and therefore the one with the most to lose in case of a failed military action. The Beltway political disincentive for the US Navy to take any action here is giant: if they screw up that's a huge nail in the coffin for the Navy, which is fighting tooth and nail these days to prove they have a role to play in the War Against Terrorism.

Now, if it was the Pacific Princess cruise ship with Pamela Anderson and a CNN crew aboard, then sure, the Navy would be gung ho to fight the pirates.

But a crummy Ukrainian freight with a boatload of reconditioned T-72 for Kenya? Heck, most of the US population couldn't even find Ukraine or Kenya on a map. Not much incentive for the Navy to do jack, in my opinion.

So, we have what we have.

- There is a moderate concentration of warships to make sure the tanks don't get lost by the wayside

- No doubt there are plenty of government people exchanging high security e-mails on What To Do About Pirates

- Maybe even a consulting company or two has been hired to Study The Pirate Problem

- The US sailors are pissed they are making donuts in the ocean off the Somali coast, when they could be doing shore leave in Cyprus or Greece

- Special ops boys from Ft. Bragg to Sydney are I am sure telling each other "If only they would let us Warriors deal with those pirates, we'd kill 'em all! - But since we won't get the op since every one in the regular military is a coward and a wimp and just doesn't understand special ops, let's just carry on with our scheduled high-speed low-drag training."

- The Ukrainians are scrambling to try and get some one to take responsibility for the problem

- The Kenyans are doing everything they can to keep the problem from being theirs

- The Russians could care less about the pirates, but they would be happy to demonstrate an ability to project naval power, even if the closest available warship is a member of the Baltic Fleet, and no I am not making that up.

- The pirates are arguing among themselves, do we punt, stand pat, or raise our demands?

And every day that goes by, just forking over 20 million and be done with it becomes the best option for pretty much every one concerned. This is not to say I see no chance of a cool raid to grab the freighter, but the logical guess is that this is going to drag on to some kind of murky negotiated resolution.

P.S. to C3K - Well, we all are the products of our experience. I in my younger years had a really boffo security clearance, and frankly, the supposedly hard intelligence I was allowed to see was for the most part to me not that impressive. Most of the time, from what I could see, the most secret stuff was about how the government either kept its secrets or tried to find out other peoples' secrets. A developing current event I found you could often follow faster and with more accuracy using open source stuff, as the area specialist general public civilians seemed to be better read, far more likely to understand the pertinant foreign language, and perhaps even more important willing to talk to one.

Government intelligence people from what I saw seemed to avoid comparing notes with colleagues like the plague, compartmented information don't you know? The Internet and instantaneous communications has I think really tipped things even more heavily away from government intelligence collection, as the be-all, end-all to learning about something. Sure, if you limit your open-source research to a few English-language major media, then definately the government does better. Sure, if what you need is a sattelite picture or an intercepted phone call or some technical specs, governments are better at getting that. But it's a big world out there and it's full of information, and if a person is willing to look, usually his analysis is just as good as the government's, often better, and pretty much always faster. Global Security or Janes' Ships for example. YMMMV of course.

[Bigduke6]

If the previous was too much text for you, here are some linkies:

Fairly good and extremely recent media report on Task Force 150, which is the multi-national naval entity responsible for fighting the pirates:

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20080920/NATIONAL/446987046/1010&profile=1010

US 5th Fleet press release about a change of command at Task Force 150, and noting what a great job they have been doing. It is worth bearing in mind that roughly one week after the 5th Fleet announced Task Force 150 was making life tough for the Somali pirates, this Ukrainian cargo ship got grabbed:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2008/09/mil-080915-nns02.htm

A press release more or less from Task Force 150, saying they are "thwarting criminal activity", but admitting they aren't stopping it all.

http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=2137

It turns out there are about 10 - 15 of these warships out there chasing pirates at any one time. At an el cheapo rate of 100K dollars per ship per day of operation, pretty much every week this task force burns through enough cash to ransom your average cargo ship. Factor in shore installations and personnel, it could be every 2-3 days.

They say they are trying to do better, but it's a big ocean out there. The implication is, of course, if taxpayers want better results they should pay for more ships and sailors and patrols.

[cabal23]

I think it is ironic that this particular story made it into the news the same week AFRICACOM goes on line. Not only that but they are replacing the European commands Trans-Sahara counter terrorism initiative in the area. Some sources are saying that we are becoming a presence along the African coastline most likely due to China and India's ambitions in Africa. Coincidence, I think not.

[John Kettler]

Bigduke6,

This strikes me as exactly the kind of application in which ultra long duration UAVs (like NASA's Sunrider), tied into launch on demand smaller strike UAVs could really change the complexion of the problem in a hurry. A high persistence UAV would provide sensor "eyeballs" 24/7, nor would it be necessary to bring pricey DD and above vessels into harm's way, for they could operate recon/strike UAVs from standoff. These days, laser-guidance can be fitted to something as small as a Hydra 2.75" rocket. I saw it demoed on the FireStorm UAV helo on Future Weapons.

This seems to me to be a way around many of the issues your analysis astutely raised, and the recon/strike UAVs would be run with a human in the loop. There are ways of stopping piracy, but we have to think creatively first. I like the directed sound technology from American Technologies, Inc. This is the acoustic beam weapon they've show on Future Weapons and other programs here in the States. Great incentive to move on!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Battlefront.com]

I agree, this is no coincidence in terms of why there is a new US command presence in Africa. The lawlessness of Somalia has been cited as one of the primary reasons for getting the command structure and responsibility straightened out. The hodge-podge afterthought attention of the past obviously needs to go.

Steve

[Michael Emrys]

What's needed is a relatively small (~1k tons), fast (30+ knots), inexpensive (it doesn't have to be able to fight WW III, just chase some poorly armed pirates) ship with a good cruising range (that's a big ocean out there if you are going to spend a lot of time patrolling it). I think the USCG has some designs that might, with suitable modification, fill the bill, and there are other maritime nations that may also.

Michael

[Bigduke6]

I think the problem is scale, or more exactly the ratio of warships to ocean to shoreline to cargo ships. In the news report I posted there was scary number in there, i.e., 22 thousand cargo and passenger ships transit the Red Sea to and from the Gulf of Aden every year. That's 60 ships a day, with a similar number approaching from the north and south at the same time.

Then there is the illegal/unregistered stuff, such as fishing boats, smugglers, freighters that don't particularly want to be noticed, the odd intrepid/stupid yachtsman, and of course whatever floats that is being used by the various militias in the region. So at any one time, in the region the pirates are operating, there are doubtless hundreds if not thousands of vessels in the water, somewhere, that might happen to be carrying pirates, or have been captured by pirates, or under attack by pirates, etc. etc.

The North coast of Somalia is rough estimate 1,000 kilometers long, and if there is any place in the world that is poorly charted then it has to be here. It is quite likely the last systematic depth soundings date back to the Italian occupation in the 1930s. Reefs move, sand shifts, villages spring up and die, bays silt and open up, heck, even the ocean bottom itself can change over that kind of time period. So even if you had the ships to flood the region, there is the not inconsiderable problem that, in alot of places, you have only the vaguest idea where it is safe to sail near the shore.

If you want to compare the distances, it's roughly similar to the entire north coast of Cuba, or the Texas and Louisiana Gulf coasts combined.

Task Force 150 has 10 - 15 warships and a couple of airplanes to try and keep track of what's going on in this area. To determine whether a particular motor boat is pirates, or cargo ship is under its own or pirate control or not, the warships have to send a motorboat with some swabbies and maybe a Marine or two to board and check things out.

A NATO destroyer has what, 2 - 4 Zodiacs and as many landing parties? So you figure if there are 10 - 15 warships then 4 - 6 are actually doing their job at any one time, and the remainder are going to or from the region or are in Djibouti on shore leave or whatever. In other words, you have tops 16 or maybe at the outside 20 Zodiacs with which to try and keep a handle on hundreds of vessels moving about thousands of square kilometers of ocean.

If I recall correctly, there is one (1) Spanish maritime patrol plane supporting this operation, and of course the bigger warships, figure 1/2 - 2/3, have a helicopter.

Now, since millions of dollars are involved, the pirates can afford to pay some one to watch the Bal El Mandeb, and indeed fishermen and any one else that's in the water around Somalia, to watch what's coming their way. They can pick and choose their targets, and it's obvious which cargo ship is flagged how, as that's what cargo ships do. Routes are known and a matter of public record, sailing speeds are known, and if you know English and can use the Internet, you can even figure out crew size and who hired them most of the time. So the pirates have this big stream of vessels that they can zip into, grab a cargo ship, and zip out of; and odds are no one will be near enough even to notice, never mind stop them.

I don't know the range of a RPV, but I suspect the distances are too big for them to operate out at sea for long enough to patrol, or even to be sent to suspicious boats. Say a cargo ship reports "motor boat with guys with AKs inside" and you want to sent an RPV. Even if it has the range it takes hours to get from the nearest launch site, Djibouti, and in several hours a motorboat can move a pretty fair distance.

Same deal with sattelite imaging; technically it's quite possible to take pictures of the region every hour or so and downlink it, but then do you have the analysts to look through tens of thousands of pictures of ocean trying to find the ones containing motorboats containing armed men, and then get that information to the warships in a timely manner?

Of course not, even if the guys with the satellites - the Americans - not looking elsewhere, and as we know the substantial portion of easily redeployable (as some isn't, you have to watch the Russian missile fields and submarine bases constantly for instance) US photo satellite capacity is aimed at Iraq and Afghanistan, trying to decide which band of guys with AKs and Toyota trucks is terrorists, and which are candidates for a hearts and mind campaign.

Mr. Emrys also has a good idea theoretically, a bunch of boats not much bigger than the pirates but able to shoot it out with them and win would certain help the situation. But of course then you get into the question of who's going to provide the boats, who's going to crew them, and who's going to protect them from a terrorist attack, as of course a little boat carrying NATO sailors is a lot easier target than a big one with of Ma Deuce MG on the side railings and bored sailors just itching to fire off some rounds.

Convoying of course is the classic answer, that could work, but that would really harm the flow of goods (see ship volumes) plus it would require a level of international maritime cooperation never seen in history, you'd need hundreds of merchant marines all willing to participate and no one willing to take his chances outside the convoy in order to beat his competitor to market.

So in sum, when one says "We must fight the pirates!" it's alot easier to take symbolic action rather than effective action. Pirate morale is probably sky high right now, they have the big boys' attention and the big boys can't do anything without commiting major reasources they are absolutely unwilling to commit.

[John Kettler]

Bigduke6,

You are so savvy and articulate I think we need to clone you. Stat. The first ones are desperately needed in the current administration, after which we'll start replacing most of our so-called journalists! I think, though, you misunderstood Michael Emrys. He said vessels of ~1000 tons, not 1. Would therefore expect hanging a Ma Deuce on it would be a nonproblem. In fact, the SEAL RIB (Rigid-hull Inflatable Boat) is tiny but carries way more firepower than a "mere" Ma Deuce. Note official NAVSEA data used at link.

http://www.bf2online.com/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=49

I think the pirates have stepped on their dangly bits, in that they've now made themselves a high profile issue, thus becoming a nail, if you will, in a giant hardware store full of hammers. Historically, this doesn't bode well at all for them, even less so with their now multiple incidents involving prime items of interest in the WOT.

Regards,

John Kettler

[cabal23]

"I think the pirates have stepped on their dangly bits, in that they've now made themselves a high profile issue, thus becoming a nail, if you will, in a giant hardware store full of hammers."

Ok can we just coin that phrase right here and now.

Pricless....

[Michael Emrys]

I think, though, you misunderstood Michael Emrys. He said vessels of ~1000 tons, not 1. Would therefore expect hanging a Ma Deuce on it would be a nonproblem.

In fact, I was thinking more or less of a pair of Deuces, a couple of 20mm (although if 25mm are more available, that would be fine by me) and maybe a 3"/76mm for longer ranged firing. But most of the tonnage I mentioned would be used for propulsion and fuel to give performance and range.

Michael

[Homo ferricus]

Blackwater and other similar PMCs offer maritime protection, i would think that should be taken advantage of on an individual basis. Is it too expensive and not seen as cost-efficient for the people running all the non-military boats in that area? Or does Blackwater for political or recent PR reasons not want to participate?

[Bigduke6]

Reading between the lines, that is I think what the military wants the shipping industry to do. I get the feeling the navies seem to be of the opinion that they know they are not up to stamping out the pirates, therefore, they would prefer business deal with the problem, so the military can get back to proper military missions. (Whatever that is.)

The businessmen, of course, seem to have a conflicting point of view: "We already pay the taxes that buy the navy warships and pay your navy salaries, why should we pay more money for mercenaries to protect our ships, when you navy types keep telling us that the point to a navy is keeping shipping safe and secure?"

The impression I gain from reading the trade literature is that Blackwater or something similar is happy to do the job but too damn expensive, and that's before you start calculating the insurance. To deal with pirates in motor boats, you have to have a couple of .50 MG or similar on every cargo ship that goes through the region, 24 hours a day, so that's six of these goons you need for every day your ship is in the region. Each costs about $300 a day, and you can't just keep them on board only for the dangerous bit, so you have to decide whether you pay them for sitting on your cargo ship for its entire transit port to port, when it's only 2-3 days in pirate-infested waters, or you pay to bring them aboard and remove them by helicopter or small boat, which also is time and money, or you bring the cargo ship into port right before or after the North Somali coast, which is money for a pair of port calls and yet more time lost.

Personally, I think 2 - 3 .30 cal on each side of the cargo ship would be more than sufficient to keep the pirates away. They're in open boats bouncing in the water while the firer is on a stable cargo ship firing downward at pirates unable to take cover. I wouldn't care if the pirates had grenade launchers, my MMGs would outrange them. I only suggest M2 because it would sink the motor boat, and also because the range on that gun is so long. Autocannon although fun to think about I think are overkill.

Anyway, if you're a ship owner considering arming your ship, having mercenaries aboard probably is going to cost you tens of thousands of dollars each time send your ship. But that's cheap, compared to what's next.

If you arm your ship against pirates you are ipso facto sending your ship into a combat zone, and that puts insurance through the roof and what's worse prevents you from taking freight from big time exporters - a major auto manufacturer for example - whose company policy is don't send the goods to hi-risk places. And of course you have to pay your own crew more, and as we have seen these typically are Ukrainians or Phillipeno or Malays or similar, i.e. you or some one like you has been paying these people the dirt market low salary for years. So no, for that kind of money they are no going to risk their lives fighting for your ship.

The alternative that the market has selected is, essentially, pretend everything is safe, and when a ship gets grabbed quietly pay the ransom out of company funds. That apparently turns out to be cheaper than hiring mercenaries, paying war insurance, and taking the customer hit for carrying freight in dangerous places.

John,

That's nice of you to say, but the thing I think worth keeping in mind here is that this isn't rocket science, all the information is out there open source for any one willing to look for it and then use a little common sense. You don't have to be Einstein to look at a map, see the Somali coast is about 1,000 kilometers long, and do the math to conclude 10 or so NATO warships haven't a prayer of securing a region that size, no matter how many UAVs you give them.

You might be right this particular band of pirates may be in a bit over their heads with this cargo ship loaded with tanks, but just remember, with all these warships surrounding the Ukrainian freighter, that's thousands of square kilometers of ocean not being patrolled. Who's to say what's going to get grabbed next, but for sure it will be easier.