Piracy and how to deal with it.

[Emil Miller]

The growing number of ships being raided by armed groups and held for ransom is a flagrant challenge to nations going about their legitimate maritime business. What are the opinions of forum members on how to deal with this unwarranted flouting of international law.

[Lokasenna]

Piracy is nothing new. My father was in the Merchant Navy during the late 50s and through until the mid 60s, and his ships were regularly attacked by pirates, particularly in the seas off China and Indonesia.

He said the solution to the problem was to have all the ship's floodlights illuminating the sea all around for half-a-mile or so; that way you could see them coming. At which point, when a pirate speed-boat (their usual transport) appeared, they just readied a load of hoses to pump high-pressure sea water, and would give any boat that came near a blasting. Unsurprisingly, its very hard to board a ship that is considerably larger than your own, while being blasted off with water delivered from a high, tactical location.

Suffice it to say, my dad's ships were never once boarded during his service, nor can he remember hearing of any other ships getting boarded.

Of course, modern pirates are better armed - dad's enemies may have had machineguns, but these modern ones have RPGs. Still, if a crew is vigilant, they do have a massive advantage over the pirates. The only gun, a simple pistol, aboard a merchant vessel (by British law, at least) is the property of the captain, and must be kept in a safe; ostensibly, it is to discourage mutiny. It has, to my knowledge, never been used to fend off pirates...

[Sapphire]

Sounds like a good consept Lokasenna. I can not say I know of any boats doing it today though (but what do I know) - I am not sure whether every merchant boat is capable of pumping high-pressure sea water like that. Plus, the pirates can board anywhere they want and with big ships it's difficult to cover every area of the ship. How do you aim those hoses, while keeping your crew safe? Where would you have that "high, tactical location"? Might it be an idea to keep this in mind when designing a ship that will sail in those waters?

The only thing I know about, is that they completely shut the living quarters, locking themselves in as you may say - and when it's dark they dim all the lights. And then it's just a case of waiting and hoping none of the pirates will find their way inside before the military/customs arrives.

I really doubt whether shooting back would do any good - you would need to train the crew and well... I do not think a shooting on board of an oil tanker is a great idea for any one involved :eek2:

As they're mostly about kidnapping now, not even sailing boats are safe (I know, not merchant fleet). Keeping away from those waters won't do any good either, as the problem will just move and keep on moving.

The point is, that those countries really profit by it. The government is corrupt, pirates are looked up to ... They're gangsters, but they have it made. What they do, is taking the money from the rich(er countries) and giving it to the poor(er countries), though that is of course just a fairytale look at it. The only way to stop it, is by making it unprofitable. And I have absolutely no idea how to do that. How do you stop kidnapping? By never giving in? That would cost a lot of lives...

I am really curious with the ideas people might come up with here. The only solution I see, is by increasing the possibilities to earn an honest living in the countries where the pirates live. Though I do see that even then, it might for some minds be easier to board a ship for 1 million dollar instead of working hard all their lives and "just" have a normal life instead of richness...

As for the marine business and an "immediate" solution - sailing in convey and with military guidance 24/7 ?!? That is surely gonna cost...

Piracy is nothing new indeed. It seems to increase though - or is it just the media coverage of the events? Events at the coast of Somalia that is (mostly), but there is lots of other dangerous water around the world where it has been unsafe for ages...

[Lokasenna]

Sounds like a good consept Lokasenna. I can not say I know of any boats doing it today though (but what do I know) - I am not sure whether every merchant boat is capable of pumping high-pressure sea water like that. Plus, the pirates can board anywhere they want and with big ships it's difficult to cover every area of the ship. How do you aim those hoses, while keeping your crew safe? Where would you have that "high, tactical location"? Might it be an idea to keep this in mind when designing a ship that will sail in those waters?

I'm assuming its still a requirement (it certainly used to be!) for all ships to be able to pump up sea-water - the idea is so that any on-board fire can be dealt with quickly. As for the crew, they man the hoses in much the same way that fire-men do - one to aim, and maybe three or four to steady it.

The high location simply comes from the fact that a large merchant vessel is much higher above the sealine than a small boat - the pirates have to climb up (grappling hooks are still the norm, so I understand), while the crew merely have to fire downwards with the hoses.

True, the ships are big, but if a decent watch is being kept while in pirate-infested waters, there shouldn't be too much of a problem. If you can see them coming for a half-a-mile or so, you should be able to defend...

At least, that's going by dad's stories!

[Sapphire]

Oh, I do not doubt they have the fascilities. It's more that I do not really see how they can make the decision to put 5 men out into the open like that - on a big ship like an oil tanker you need a bicycle to go from one side to the other (or at least it's easier). I just wonder what the range of those sea water pumps is in regard to the machinery of the pirates. If the guns out range the pumps they'll just shoot the guys down who are trying to aim it ... maybe that's the difference with the '50/'60s - that the pirates are better armed? Not sure, just speculating.

Is the ship hull enough of an army pantser for the crew to just hang the hose over the edge and let it blow down on the pirates? Maybe, but then there's still the problem that if you put that kind of pressure on a hose, you need to put quite some force on it to let it blow downwards - the pressure of the water tries to straighten the hose out...

Ow, and there is also the point that nowdays there is much less crew aboard of ships than in the 50s/60s. Optimization, industralisation etc - they're being designed to be handled by as less people as possible (so "decent watches" with 6 men on deck all the time might become a problem).

Maybe ships in those areas should be obliged to take soldiers on board? Or special trained men who know how to use hoses on pirates ...

And I do believe your dad his stories :D I am glad it worked out for him. I just wonder a bit about the practical use of it (nowdays).

[Chava]

Maybe the best way of dealing with it, is to deal with why they are committing piracy. Not exactly like Somaila and the like have a hell of a lot of other free-time alternatives. Seriously though, Piracy is a horrible thing, but I don't think it can be stopped by force of arms. There will always be more pirates, so long as it is possible to get away, and for the most part, they do, since the marines in the area take time to arrive.
While arms on arms may seem the best short term alternative, I've no doubt that more efforts should be put into helping the situation on land. Pirates steal for the same reason most people steal, out of need. Need doesn't go away at gunpoint.

[JBI]

Growing number is a misconception. Growing amount of news coverage more like.

[TheFifthElement]

:lol: Lokasenna and JBI said it already. Piracy is not new or increasing, just increasingly in the news. Read Lloyds list. It really is quite common.

You can't stop piracy any more than you can stop any other crime.

That being said, the potential costs involved in dealing with an act of piracy are considered a General Average event, which means that the majority of the cost will be bourne by the Insurance Companies. We now have Health and Safety inspectors moving into Somalia to compulsorily insure them into submission. Don't worry, it'll all be over soon ;)

[Sapphire]

which means that the majority of the cost will be bourne by the Insurance Companies
If the insurance companies can not "earn" from an insurance, they will just refuse to insure it. Or the premium will become way too high for any company to bear. One already thinks many attacks are not claimed by the insurance companies to keep the premiums from going up into the air.

I also think that that piracy is "any other crime", but as we do try to fight the other crimes and have ideas on what would be the best way to deal with it, the question what to do with/against piracy remains.

As mentioned before, to stop "crime from poverty" one should make sure the people get the chance to earn their living in a more honest way. That might diminish piracy, but I believe there are also people who do it for the thrill and quick/easy money. It will become harder though, as without poverty (there's a long shot...) a country might be more stable and the police/coast guard might go harder on the pirates.

I myself am quite interested in the means now, at this moment - for a company that has ships sailing there (a "solution" within a short period of time). Anybody who has an idea on what to do when a potential treat of pirates is spotted by a merchant vessel? What could be changed in its design, or crew, or entourage to make the pirates say "no thanks, we'll find ourselves a different job"? Besides for the ships to change their course?
I do see that solution is just a solution for one side of the parties. I also see it's dealing with a problem after it occurs, instead of solving the problem. I just wonder about that too, despite the question of how to solve the inequality in this world and the crime following from such inequality.

I think Brian means it in a more broader sense than I look at it though (do correct me if I read this wrong) - as he asks rather what nations or international law might be able to do about it.

[Emil Miller]

Growing number is a misconception. Growing amount of news coverage more like.

I'm afraid you are wrong. In 2005 there were two acts of piracy off the Somali coast. In 2006 there was one. In 2007 there were six. In 2008 there were fifty-one. So far this year there have been twenty-nine, including the most recent in which US warships managed to free an American hostage.
Figures pre 2005 were not available but since 2006, it has obviously become an increasing problem for cargo and other non-naval vessels in those waters.

[Sapphire]

I'm afraid you are wrong. In 2005 there were two acts of piracy off the Somali coast. In 2006 there was one. In 2007 there were six. In 2008 there were fifty-one. So far this year there have been twenty-nine, including the most recent in which US warships managed to free an American hostage.
Figures pre 2005 were not available but since 2006, it has obviously become an increasing problem for cargo and other non-naval vessels in those waters.
In those waters, YES. But piracy in the world at large, NO. Though, again - it's hard to say how the reported incidents compare to the real numbers.

[TheFifthElement]

If the insurance companies can not "earn" from an insurance, they will just refuse to insure it. Or the premium will become way too high for any company to bear. One already thinks many attacks are not claimed by the insurance companies to keep the premiums from going up into the air.

No, proportionally the number of attacks by pirates comparative to the amount of ship/freight at sea is still incredibly low. General Average events (groundings/engine failure/collision/etc) are anticipated as part of the cost of the insurance and unless piracy becomes a significant factor then the cost will continue to be absorbed as part of a standard Marine Insurance policy. General Average events have been covered for as long as Marine Insurance has been in existence (I think they traced it back to the Phoenicians) and this is not likely to change just because the number of pirate attacks around Somalia have increased.


I think Brian means it in a more broader sense than I look at it though (do correct me if I read this wrong) - as he asks rather what nations or international law might be able to do about it.

But that was my point, little if anything more will be done. An Internationally Recognised Transit Corridor has already been set up around the Gulf of Aden, involving the deployment of military assets to protect shipping. But if this succeeds the piracy will simply move elsewhere (before they were reporting Somalia so openly the piracy attacks were and still are occurring around Nigeria, Bangladesh, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia (more specifically South China Sea), Brazil). In 2007 there were 263 pirate attacks on vessels. In 2008 there were 293. These are very, very insignificant numbers. Taking 9th April as a sample day there were 32 shipping casualties, none of which related to piracy. Whilst there are certainly perils at sea which need to be addressed/countered/minimised piracy isn't the top priority. Looking at it from the bald numbers point of view, the potential cost of any protective measures will significantly outweigh the current financial cost of piracy. It is rare that pirates are interested in either the vessel or cargo - the main issue seems to be around hostage taking and ransom collection. No matter how canny the pirates are there's little chance they can make off with a container vessel stocked with, say, 200+ containers, dispose of the vessel and the cargo and not get caught; though there is traffic in containers (not the cargo - containers can and are used as 'homes' in certain countries) and rare theft of vessels - though often these are 'tramp' vessels which can be repainted and re-registered under a different name. But again, these instances are so rare as to be considered insignificant against the cost of the normal hazards of shipping.

[Sapphire]

Thank you for explaining the insurance policies FifthElement. I wonder though - is it not a bit like car insurance? If you have damage, the premium increases? So if you sail in Somalian waters (=high risk), you will need to pay an additional amount? That would make sense to me: make ships pay more when they are more in danger of getting "damaged"?
But wait, now I cloud my own reasoning, for if the water is already a high risk and thus the highest premium - it would be no use to keep the damage a secret anymore ... It is just that I read in most accounts that people expect that a big amount of attacks is still kept a secret. Maybe it's more a kidnapping/security thing than an insurance thing then?

And indeed, in that I said "Brian means it in a broader sense" I was regarding to my own narrowing - as I myself am so curious about how companies deal with it right now as I mentioned in the alinea above it. But that's probably not the prime interest of this thread :) I did not mean to say you were straying from the subject - not at all! You seem to really know what you're talking about while I am just guessing.

Yes - the problem is hostage. But that is the frighting thing about it: it is not "just" theft, it's the selling of human beings. And yes, the (sex) slave trade is much bigger than this small hostage taking on the water part. It would be a logical choice to focus more on that? Maybe - it might be a bit like people being afraid of flying after a couple of airplanes crash in a short period of time, forgetting the huge amount of car crashes that happen every day. Though that might be a wrong comparison, as those are accidents and we're not talking ship accidents here (which probably kill much more humans than piracy).
It is would still be nice though if some solution could be found - even if on the total of negative events it is just a small, small part....

[JBI]

I'm afraid you are wrong. In 2005 there were two acts of piracy off the Somali coast. In 2006 there was one. In 2007 there were six. In 2008 there were fifty-one. So far this year there have been twenty-nine, including the most recent in which US warships managed to free an American hostage.
Figures pre 2005 were not available but since 2006, it has obviously become an increasing problem for cargo and other non-naval vessels in those waters.

I don't want to get into an argument, because last one didn't go well, so I'll be brief.

The American conception of piracy has increased, because perhaps America is being more affected directly, or perhaps because of some other agenda'd issue. Piracy, in the sea sense, has been dying out for a while, and rates are low, though they have dipped slightly since 2007 according to Wikipedia, if they can be trusted.

It's a sense one gets from reading the news - if one reads certain papers, one is made to feel unsafe. If one reads another paper, one is made to feel economically cheated, etc. What is reported, in terms of what gets coverage, affects how one sees the world. In that sense, it can be said that powers up above, such as corporations, are at work to make piracy seem a bigger problem, or perhaps a bigger problem than most things going on in the world today that they could report on. This is the way things are in virtually every media outlet, though some media companies provide better coverage than others. Al Jezeerah for instance, is an excellent reporter on Issues dealing with the Middle East, and because of the nature of the media, manage to create a much better representation of the news than what was available in the past. In that sense, if one turned, for instance, to Somalian media coverage of the event, it would offer a completely different perspective.

Of course though, the taking of a relief ship is completely uncalled for, but I guess they thought it an oil tanker.

Keep in mind, I don't support terrorism or piracy in any way, it just makes you think about perspective, and what Globalization really means.

[Emil Miller]

:lol: We now have Health and Safety inspectors moving into Somalia to compulsorily insure them into submission. Don't worry, it'll all be over soon ;)


I take it that you mean that ironically. That bunch of jobsworths would put a stop to everything if they could.

[Virgil]

As far as I'm concerned, blow those S-O-B's out of the water. Hooray for what happened yesterday. Now we need to keep it up. Let them be forewarned. If you steal, kidnap or kill, you pay the consequences. Frankly I think there is a fairly solid international consensus to wipe these scum out. Appeasement leads to more piracy. Look at the numbers Brian posted. This has been escalating for a few years. The escalation finally will stop when they start paying a price.

[jon1jt]

The growing number of ships being raided by armed groups and held for ransom is a flagrant challenge to nations going about their legitimate maritime business. What are the opinions of forum members on how to deal with this unwarranted flouting of international law.


The US needs to sign the International Criminal Court and International Law Of The Sea agreements.

[Lokasenna]

As far as I'm concerned, blow those S-O-B's out of the water. Hooray for what happened yesterday. Now we need to keep it up. Let them be forewarned. If you steal, kidnap or kill, you pay the consequences. Frankly I think there is a fairly solid international consensus to wipe these scum out. Appeasement leads to more piracy. Look at the numbers Brian posted. This has been escalating for a few years. The escalation finally will stop when they start paying a price.

Interestingly, piracy with violence in British waters is the only crime still punishable by death that we have in Britain, thanks to a legal loophole. While the 1998 Human Rights Act (**spits**) bound us to the European Convention of Human Rights, making the death penalty impossible (previously, treason was also punishable by death), the seas still operate under admiralty law, rather than judicial, and aren't covered by the HRA.

So, if you're plotting to pillage Wales or something (and why would you?), prepare yourself!

[subterranean]

The water area of Northern Indonesia is consistently one of the world's dangerous as it holds the role of gateway to the global economy. The men from the northern islands in Indonesia are well known as high-skilled seamen, inherited from the previous generations with their water culture. Sea always been the source of living. But with the change of global economy, these men are hardly able to compete with big players, even for fish! Legitimate jobs are scarce and not wanting to beg, they steal instead. These pirates are some of the top ones in the world and they are also open for hire. And sometimes with one take out, they can 'disappear' for few months before going back to the sea again for another action.

I don't really follow the story about the recent piracy act. But as one said already, it's not a new thing and somehow, I tend to point my finger to uneven distribution of wealth as root cause in a case like this.

[TheFifthElement]

piracy with violence in British waters is the only crime still punishable by death that we have in Britain
That's not the case. The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 abolished the death penalty for acts of treason and piracy in UK law.


Art 36 (5) In section 2 of the [1837 c. 88.] Piracy Act 1837 (punishment of piracy when murder is attempted), for the words “and being convicted thereof shall suffer death” there shall be substituted the words “and being convicted thereof shall be liable to imprisonment for life”.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980037_en_4#pt2-pb3-l1g36

UK admiralty law still comes under the jurisdiction of the UK courts and admiralty law (even internationally agreed) is generally encompassed into UK legislation, for example the Hague Rules were codified as UK law under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1965, updated to the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1986 with the accession to the Hague-Visby Rules. The law surrounding piracy on the high seas is codified in the Merchant Shipping and Maritime Security Act 1997 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1997/ukpga_19970028_en_3#pb7-l1g26 and represents the agreed international law under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982). Acts of piracy occurring within British territorial waters are covered by standard criminal law and would be considered 'robbery' or similar under the Offences at Sea Act 1799.


Look at the numbers Brian posted. This has been escalating for a few years. The escalation finally will stop when they start paying a price.

Brian's numbers are flawed as they refer only to piracy around Somalia. Piracy numbers are growing, true, but from a small number to a slightly larger but very small number. How much cash/resource should be devoted to combatting what is probably one of the least pervasive crimes committed globally? If only music/movie piracy could be reduced to 293 crimes globally. Or theft, or fraud (like your famous Mr Madoff), or sex trafficking, or kidnapping, or murder, and so on and so forth.

Blown all out of proportion. And I thought you didn't pay attention to the media ;)

[Lokasenna]

I stand corrected! Someone told me that once, and it sounded plausible to me... oh well... sorry!

[MissScarlett]

Pirates steal for the same reason most people steal, out of need. Need doesn't go away at gunpoint.

I don't think most people steal out of need. I think most people steal for the thrill of stealing. Many times people steal when they have millions of dollars in the bank. Criminals can't be deterred by thought of the consequences - jail or prison. People who are not inclined to commit crimes are deterred by the thought of the punishment.

I think pirates are people who would be pirates even if they had no need to be. They could steal ten million in gold, have no need, and still steal more.

I think they should be literally blown out of the water. Let them know this is not a good way to satisfy their greed.

[JBI]

As far as I'm concerned, blow those S-O-B's out of the water. Hooray for what happened yesterday. Now we need to keep it up. Let them be forewarned. If you steal, kidnap or kill, you pay the consequences. Frankly I think there is a fairly solid international consensus to wipe these scum out. Appeasement leads to more piracy. Look at the numbers Brian posted. This has been escalating for a few years. The escalation finally will stop when they start paying a price.

There are enough people who say the same thing about the U.S., both abroad and within it. From an international angle, one could say that since the States doesn't adhere to international law, why shouldn't one do the same. If I was to go down this road, which I'm not, since I think Chomsky does it better than anyone else, despite his major biases, I could find episodes of theft, kidnap, and murder done by Americans, and in truth, I could probably dig up pretty easily the first and last one by Canadians, though I think the kidnap part would be difficult to find.

Piracy has not been escalating. Piracy in one area has been escalating, as have the number of American ships passing through their, and the American coverage. In a Global sense, it seems ridiculous to only consider piracy a problem when it affects American interests, though I guess from an American perspective, it is becoming a bigger "problem".

Seriously, this discussion is pushing very close to politics, and I don't want to get a ban, so I think I'm going to retire from now on. Just remember though, piracy is a minimal thing, and a lot of you are riding on the sensationalist coverage put out by a couple of events in one area of the world.

[Emil Miller]

Brian's numbers are flawed as they refer only to piracy around Somalia. Piracy numbers are growing, true, but from a small number to a slightly larger but very small number. How much cash/resource should be devoted to combatting what is probably one of the least pervasive crimes committed globally? If only music/movie piracy could be reduced to 293 crimes globally. Or theft, or fraud (like your famous Mr Madoff), or sex trafficking, or kidnapping, or murder, and so on and so forth.

Blown all out of proportion. And I thought you didn't pay attention to the media ;)

I think you are missing the point. It is obviously disingenuous to suggest that Bernard Madoff's fraud or music/movie making "piracy" bears any relationship to piracy at sea. And as for kidnapping and murder that is exactly what the pirates have been engaged in as a number crew members have been killed in pirate attacks. I wonder if you would question the amount of cash/resources that should be devoted to tackling piracy if one of your relatives had been the Chinese crew member who was executed when a shipping company refused to pay the ransom demanded by Somali pirates in one of their increasingly daring attacks. If piracy has been blown out of all proportion, why has the UN granted foreign vessels the right to enter Somali waters in pursuit of pirates and a multi-national task force assembled at the behest of the UN Security Council to deal with incidents in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden.

[JBI]

I think you are missing the point. It is obviously disingenuous to suggest that Bernard Madoff's fraud or music/movie making "piracy" bears any relationship to piracy at sea. And as for kidnapping and murder that is exactly what the pirates have been engaged in as a number crew members have been killed in pirate attacks. I wonder if you would question the amount of cash/resources that should be devoted to tackling piracy if one of your relatives had been the Chinese crew member who was executed when a shipping company refused to pay the ransom demanded by Somali pirates in one of their increasingly daring attacks. If piracy has been blown out of all proportion, why has the UN granted foreign vessels the right to enter Somali waters in pursuit of pirates and a multi-national task force assembled at the behest of the UN Security Council to deal with incidents in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden.

I knew I wasn't supposed to jump in, but again you miss the point. There is a whole lot more Sea and Ocean than the Gulf of Aden. Perhaps violence and piracy in the gulf of Aden is up, but does that mean Piracy is up? Does that mean Piracy is a problem, or the Sea of Aden? Somalia has been in Civil War on and off for 30 odd years (in which the U.S. finally decided to act in accordance with the UN in 2007, as suited their interests). What do you expect?

That being said, does that mean piracy is a growing issue? Does that mean it is a major issue? Well, perhaps, though other countries, including the United States, have abducted people against international law. Perhaps abduction of people should be against the law, but from that point, I can't see how it justifies a harder cracking down on piracy, an issue which just recently became an interest to mainstream American and Canadian media, because it directly affects their interests now, whereas before when it was in the waters around Indonesia, which from what I know is the biggest hotbed of piracy, didn't particularly phase anyone. As a Global issue, it is slowly disappearing. As an American Issue? Perhaps it is finally getting in the spotlight, because it is Americans who are taken as hostages, an act which, if anyone knows their history, received over a million dollars a day worth of media coverage on the ground funding while it occurred in Iran, and therefore shows very interesting things in the way American Media manufactures and exploits issues. It would seem, that when hostage crises occur, they get the biggest coverage when they deal with Americans being abducted by "America's enemies", or "Lawless terrorists", or "Pirates", whereas when they occur with anyone else, don't particularly make the headlines.

So yeah, perhaps the Gulf of Aden is seeing an upsurge in piracy, and is becoming a problem. But Piracy as a problem? Well, I think since now the tables have perhaps turned, it has become a problem, but as a global one? It's a dying cause. an upsurge in activity by Somalians doesn't warrant an international crisis, or an invasion, merely protection of vessels crossing through the Gulf, which is already happening.

[MissScarlett]

I think Somali pirates pose a very big problem. Today, they captured four more ships and took sixty people hostage to "show they won't be deterred."

I think that goes back to what I said: People don't steal out of need, but out of the desire to break the law.

I don't want to be banned for discussing politics, either, so the only thing I have to say about this falls under the heading of "News."

[Virgil]

Brian's numbers are flawed as they refer only to piracy around Somalia. Piracy numbers are growing, true, but from a small number to a slightly larger but very small number. How much cash/resource should be devoted to combatting what is probably one of the least pervasive crimes committed globally? If only music/movie piracy could be reduced to 293 crimes globally. Or theft, or fraud (like your famous Mr Madoff), or sex trafficking, or kidnapping, or murder, and so on and so forth.

Blown all out of proportion. And I thought you didn't pay attention to the media ;)
You are quite right about trusting the media. Perhaps I am being led astray by the coverage. I have no way of knowing, and that does prove my point about the media and the news we get. That said how do I trust your sources? Did you actually keep the data on piracy occurrences? I have no way to know who is correct. [And let me add I'm not suggesting either of you are lying, just that you get your information differently.] One can get one perspective on news from a news that slants left and aonther that one slants right. I have found that sometimes one turns out to be more correct than the other and sometimes neither turn out to be correct. I have said this a couple of times here on the forum, in the few issues or events that I have personally had close and immediate information (either an issue dealing with work or a neighborhood event that made the news) the news got key elements wrong. The news is not a reliable source. It is strictly a source.

That said, I have no idea how big the problem of piracy is, but however big it is I refuse to give in to kidnappers and theives. You wish to pay millions of dollars in this fashion so be it. I'd rather kill them.

I'm not going to get into a political discussion here on a literature forum (frankly I couldn't care less what people's opinions are) but since you've engaged in this you can listen to my two cents.

For those that believe there is a tangible thing called international law, please for the sake of your own countries, drop your idealism. International law is an illusion. There is no international law because there is no method of enforcing it. All across the world there are wars and disputes that to some degree one nation must be in the wrong. The dispute in kashmir between Pakistan and India. I'm not saying who is right, I have no idea, but where is the "law" to resolve it? Where is the "law" in what I consider genocide in Darfur? Where is the "law" in the various middle east disputes? Where was the "law" in the Russia/Georgia dispute? There is no law. Drop your idealism. The only law is what you can defend through your military. That is the hard cold reality. International law is a piece of paper. I would rather trust the law of a 120mm cannon on top of a M1 Tank. There is a reason why almost every country in this world has a military and continues to train an army and navy and buy weapon systems. Because that piece of paper you call international law is not going to protect you from a platoon of tanks.

As to the "poor" pirates. Oh my heart bleeds for their poverty. :sick: How come they didn't stop pirating after they made their first several million off their first hijacked ship? A couple of million dollars in Somalia is probably like 100 million dollars in a developed country. How come their sudden wealth didn't make them stop? How come they aren't sharing their sudden wealth with their countrymen? The millions of people in Somalia are dirt poor. And yet the several thousand pirates must be living quite a life with those millions of dollars. This bleeding heart perception of why peaple steal is rather silly. Did Madoff who was a billionaire stop stealing? Was he poor? What about all the poor people across the world, billions actually, who do not steal? How come they struggle along without thieving or killing? I grew up poor, I never stole. In my very neighborhood that I grew up there were people who turn to lives of crime. They weren't poor. I had a friend who wound up in the mafia. Ultimate he was killed. He wasn't poor. Poverty is not the deciding factor for a life of crime. Actually that's an insult to all the poor people who struggle and work their way honestly.

[TheFifthElement]

That said how do I trust your sources? Did you actually keep the data on piracy occurrences?

Virge, piracy is an issue which is very topical in my line of work. My data comes from the IMB (International Maritime Bureau) which has a specialist bureau to collate reported instances of piracy or suspected piracy. You can read about it here: http://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30&Itemid=12



I think you are missing the point. It is obviously disingenuous to suggest that Bernard Madoff's fraud or music/movie making "piracy" bears any relationship to piracy at sea. And as for kidnapping and murder that is exactly what the pirates have been engaged in as a number crew members have been killed in pirate attacks. I wonder if you would question the amount of cash/resources that should be devoted to tackling piracy if one of your relatives had been the Chinese crew member who was executed when a shipping company refused to pay the ransom demanded by Somali pirates in one of their increasingly daring attacks.

Brian, I think you missed the point. Piracy is a crime like any other crime and the in the context of crime as a general issue the comparison with Madoff, copyright theft and any other crime is a valid one. 293 instances of piracy globally. How much money is being spent? Should we have military patrols in rough areas of town to protect overwhelmingly larger numbers of people who might be injured or killed in a mugging or other violent attack? Yes, I'm sure I'd be pretty upset if one of my relatives was violently attacked at sea or on land for that matter but playing the 'if it was your relative' card is always a sign of a weak argument. Isn't it disingenous to expect the bereaved to make rational, objective judgements about those responsible for their bereavement? I'd be upset if my Mum was run over. Does that mean it's okay for me to petrol bomb the driver's house? Should my mother, or anyone else for that matter, have a military escort when she goes out to protect her against the possibility of a random attack? Of course not.


If piracy has been blown out of all proportion, why has the UN granted foreign vessels the right to enter Somali waters in pursuit of pirates and a multi-national task force assembled at the behest of the UN Security Council to deal with incidents in the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden.
The answer is simple: Suez Canal.

The only interesting aspect of these recent attacks is the success in attacking container vessels which were considered relatively safe. The pirates have certainly upped their game but having exposed a weakness the shipping industry will respond and the 'need' for patrols in that areas will soon be over.

[Emil Miller]

Virge, piracy is an issue which is very topical in my line of work. My data comes from the IMB (International Maritime Bureau) which has a specialist bureau to collate reported instances of piracy or suspected piracy. You can read about it here: http://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30&Itemid=12




Brian, I think you missed the point. Piracy is a crime like any other crime and the in the context of crime as a general issue the comparison with Madoff, copyright theft and any other crime is a valid one. 293 instances of piracy globally. How much money is being spent? Should we have military patrols in rough areas of town to protect overwhelmingly larger numbers of people who might be injured or killed in a mugging or other violent attack? Yes, I'm sure I'd be pretty upset if one of my relatives was violently attacked at sea or on land for that matter but playing the 'if it was your relative' card is always a sign of a weak argument. Isn't it disingenous to expect the bereaved to make rational, objective judgements about those responsible for their bereavement? I'd be upset if my Mum was run over. Does that mean it's okay for me to petrol bomb the driver's house? Should my mother, or anyone else for that matter, have a military escort when she goes out to protect her against the possibility of a random attack? Of course not.


The answer is simple: Suez Canal.

The only interesting aspect of these recent attacks is the success in attacking container vessels which were considered relatively safe. The pirates have certainly upped their game but having exposed a weakness the shipping industry will respond and the 'need' for patrols in that areas will soon be over.


My original question on this thread was: Piracy and how to deal with it.
Introducing Bernard Madoff etc into the discussion and a hypothetical situation in which your mother is run over cannot detract from the fact that piracy is, on your own admission, increasing.
You have quoted figures given out by the IMB and appear to be ignoring the fact that they do not account for the number of incidents that go unreported because carriers don't want to claim against their insurers, which would raise the premiums, and incur the delay caused by the subsequent investigation, which would also cost them dearly, and would therefore rather pay off the pirates out of their own resources.
Due to these unreported incidents, it is difficult calculate the amount of money lost through piracy but it is believed to run into billions of dollars per annum.
The journal Foreign Affairs states that pirate attacks worldwide tripled in the past decade and is now at its highest level in modern history. Obviously the current situation off the Horn of Africa most clearly demonstrates the need for an international military response. I have to agree with Virgil that the more pirates that are killed the better it will be for those going about the lawful business of keeping the world supllied with daily essentials. The only good thing to result from piracy in the Indian ocean and elsewhere is that it might teach us not to take for granted the work of the shipping agencies on which we all rely.

[TheFifthElement]

Introducing Bernard Madoff etc into the discussion and a hypothetical situation in which your mother is run over cannot detract from the fact that piracy is, on your own admission, increasing.

Well, my hypothetical situation was only as hypothetical as yours and if you hadn't raised your's, mine wouldn't have been necessary ;)

And piracy is increasing from a miniscule number to a miniscule number. Not worth getting into a sweat about, really.


You have quoted figures given out by the IMB and appear to be ignoring the fact that they do not account for the number of incidents that go unreported because carriers don't want to claim against their insurers, which would raise the premiums, and incur the delay caused by the subsequent investigation, which would also cost them dearly, and would therefore rather pay off the pirates out of their own resources.

So, let me see if I'm understanding this right. What you're saying is that we should address piracy as a major issue because of the possibility that there might be lots more unreported incidents which might be costing billions of dollars and might be being paid out of the shipping lines' own pockets. And you criticise me for being hypothetical ;)

You may not realise this but the IMB is completely independent of the insurance companies and they're good friends to the shipping industry. Masters report piracy or attempted piracy direct to the IMB whether or not they choose to claim on their insurance.

Second to that, paying a ransom to pirates would be, as I mentioned before, a General Average event. If the shipping lines pay it out of their own pocket they can then recoup their money back from all parties sharing in the 'marine adventure' by declaring a General Average event, thus avoiding the necessity to carry the full cost under their own policy and pay additional premiums as a result. It is usually the case that the value of the cargo 'saved' significantly outweighs the value of the ship, meaning that the majority of the costs would be carried by the Cargo owners, or rather the Cargo owners' insurers. Whether or not the cargo owners insurers pass on that cost to their insureds is of no relevance to a ships master or the shipping line and would have no bearing on their decision to pay or not to pay a ransom.

[Sapphire]

@TheFifthElement

The only interesting aspect of these recent attacks is the success in attacking container vessels which were considered relatively safe. The pirates have certainly upped their game but having exposed a weakness the shipping industry will respond and the 'need' for patrols in that areas will soon be over.
Could you please explain why container vessels were considered relatively safe? Is it something in their design, for example the speed they can gain (though I really doubt they can outrun pirates) or something which makes them difficult to board? Or is it rather that one did not expect the pirates to go for container ships as it's not easy to profit on the cargo?
And what kind of response do you expect from the shipping industry? What can they do to make patrols superfluous?

And thank you for explaining the insurance/General Average event again - I think I finally get how it works :) Or at least I think so...

As piracy has been around for a long long time, I figured we might be able to learn a lesson from history?! I mean - how did they try to solve piracy in the old days? I think the "solutions" were quite the same: sail in convey, put navy ships in the area, add soldiers to the crew. Here's an article on how Jefferson dealt with it (http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/mtjprece.html). He refused to pay ransom and went to war... At sea AND on land.
Now there's that point again: as long as the pirates can find harbours/villages to stock in, as long as there are countries/villagers who support them - they can go on. Is it maybe possible to cut their resources off?

I myself think this means (again) that the countries close to the waters in which these acts of piracy take place should become stable - with a healthy economy. Now wouldn't it be marvellous if there was a way to make that work... Solve world poverty and inequality? But then again I think that would be the answer to any problem - no idea how to make it happen though.

[Emil Miller]

Well, my hypothetical situation was only as hypothetical as yours and if you hadn't raised your's, mine wouldn't have been necessary ;)

And piracy is increasing from a miniscule number to a miniscule number. Not worth getting into a sweat about, really.



So, let me see if I'm understanding this right. What you're saying is that we should address piracy as a major issue because of the possibility that there might be lots more unreported incidents which might be costing billions of dollars and might be being paid out of the shipping lines' own pockets. And you criticise me for being hypothetical ;).


There was nothing hypothetical about the hostage who was murdered but the possibilty of your mother being run over is.

With regard to the above points that you have also mentioned, the extracts given below are from a report on modern day piracy that were printed in Global Politician; which is an independent magazine providing in-depth analysis of events in the world today:


For data comparison purposes 1998 is used by many as a baseline year. The summary of that year’s pirate attacks reads:

* 15 merchants vessels hijacked
* 138 merchant vessels boarded and attacked
* 13 merchant vessels fired upon
* Over 35 merchant crew members murdered
* 75 merchant crew members severely injured
* Over 400 merchant crew members taken hostage

The statistics contain though reported and documented attacks only. The real estimate maintains that at least 60% of similar and less damaging and unsuccessful incidents and attacks were never reported due to insurance marketing concerns, and fears of crew and passengers demoralization. In comparison, in year 2000 the overall attacks increased by 65%. The statistics do not include at least 3,000 more incidents involving yachts and smaller boats, and scores of unreported piracy events.


In 2003 there were 445 incidents compared to 370 events in 2002, and the numbers keeps climbing by an average of 25% yearly, in spite of concentrated efforts by local authorities and a growing cooperation between countries and intelligence agencies. More so, the attacks are increasingly more deadly reaching 23 crew and passengers killed and 71 crew & passengers missing in 2003 compared to the year before. Those figures do not include scores of incidents and piracy events that did not occur in international waters, many unreported events due to shipping companies’ policies, and attacks by or known to be connected to terrorism.

[subterranean]

I don't think most people steal out of need. I think most people steal for the thrill of stealing. Many times people steal when they have millions of dollars in the bank. Criminals can't be deterred by thought of the consequences - jail or prison. People who are not inclined to commit crimes are deterred by the thought of the punishment.

I think pirates are people who would be pirates even if they had no need to be. They could steal ten million in gold, have no need, and still steal more.


Interesting assumptions. I wonder where did they come from...

[AimusSage]

There is a big difference between a need and a want. People have basic needs. If they cannot provide these themselves with good reason they deserve to have those needs filled, like food, fresh drinking water etc. If people have wants, they'll have to work for it themselves, provide them with an opportunity and they'll probably take it unless they see a better opportunity themselves. If you don't even bother to give them an opportunity, they'll find one themselves or remain with at best their basic needs met.

It might be these pirates have a want, more money power or whatever it is they want exactly, and see an opportunity in hijacking ships. Now this is a huge assumption, for all I know there are just a few pirate lords that force their scallywags, cut-throats and able seamen to hijack the ships and giving these people an opportunity to earn an honest living to fill their needs and wants might just do the trick.

It is easy to be judge jury and executioner from a comfortable chair. Unless one knows the full situation, it is often better to reserve judgement to the well informed, and if there are none sufficiently informed, investigate further. Neither Naiveté nor rash judgement can fix a situation like the Somalian piracy or piracy in general for that matter, rather they tend to make a small issue become a thermo-nuclear bomb of multiple issues.


Lost my train of thought... bugger.

Right, well, having said all that, I'm tempted to hijack the Victory from her dry dock, sail to the Somali coast and fire of some grapeshot at those bloody buccaneers for good ol' times sake.

[Virgil]

Virge, piracy is an issue which is very topical in my line of work. My data comes from the IMB (International Maritime Bureau) which has a specialist bureau to collate reported instances of piracy or suspected piracy. You can read about it here: http://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30&Itemid=12


There you proved my point about the media. They get things wrong and distort. It was with a similar experience with work stuff that really enlightened me on this. You proved it once again.

Note: Don't trust the media. Take it with a grain of salt.

[JBI]

There you proved my point about the media. They get things wrong and distort. It was with a similar experience with work stuff that really enlightened me on this. You proved it once again.

Note: Don't trust the media. Take it with a grain of salt.

The problem though, you can't trust Chomsky either, since he comments on the media. The answer, The Gulf War Never Happened, AKA Baudrillardian nihilism. Everything is but a simulacra of the truth eh?

There's the problem. If the media cannot be trusted, can anything? Can we trust history at all? Can we trust biography? What about the very foundational grand narratives that make up history, for the Americans, for instance, the histories of the Revolution, the Civil War, and many other major events?

Everything is rather narrative-dependent, and must be, to an extent, contrived. We cannot trust the media, yet there is no replacement. Al-Jazeera may have replaced the contrived propaganda of of the first Gulf War, which was limited to the perspective of CNN, but even they, now during the second one, are limited to what they can report about, and subject to their own biases.

To take this back to piracy - we know not of the real issues, unless we going digging, but even then, we can only get so close. Something as simple as Google can generate results dependent on the wills of certain groups over others, simply by the way the algorithm is designed. The "True" figures cannot even be arrived at. For instance, Brian suggests that piracy from 98 to 2004 was up. That is true, but one may question his source, and ask why did they not mention rated drastically reducing after 2004 reaching a bottom in 2007, with a slight dip in 2008. One wonders.

[Virgil]

Frankly, I think Chomsky is an *******. If you're getting your info from Chomsky then I can see why yuo have views like you do. Talk about biased information. Can't you find someone even more remotely objective and ideological? Good God.

edit: Oh I see that didn't come through. It's a seven letter word that starts with a and ends with e.

[TheFifthElement]

There was nothing hypothetical about the hostage who was murdered

You presented a hypothetical situation as follows:


I wonder if you would question the amount of cash/resources that should be devoted to tackling piracy if one of your relatives had been the Chinese crew member who was executed when a shipping company refused to pay the ransom demanded by Somali pirates in one of their increasingly daring attacks.

As you well know, this 'Chinese crew member' is not my relative, therefore you asked me to comment on a hypothetical situation.

However, it appears that the above situation is more hypothetical than you're letting on. I have found no such report of a chinese crew member being 'executed' by Somali pirates. So far the only report of a death I can find in relation to Somali pirates is the Frenchman whose yacht was hijacked, and it is currently suspected that he was killed by friendly fire. Please enlighten us with a link.



With regard to the above points that you have also mentioned, the extracts given below are from a report on modern day piracy that were printed in Global Politician; which is an independent magazine providing in-depth analysis of events in the world today:

How have they reached their data? If this number is correct:


In 2003 there were 445 incidents compared to 370 events in 2002, and the numbers keeps climbing by an average of 25% yearly,

and there were 263 incidents in 2007 and 293 incidents in 2008 then surely piracy is falling? Last time I checked 445 was more than 293, or am I missing something? And the growth from 2007 to 2008 was 11% not 25%. Journalists are nothing if not bombastic, and I treat your 'source' with great skepticism. And why 1998 as a base year? According to the IMB they've been keeping statistics since at least 1992 and prior to that records were kept by the IMO.

And this:


The statistics contain though reported and documented attacks only. The real estimate maintains that at least 60% of similar and less damaging and unsuccessful incidents and attacks were never reported due to insurance marketing concerns, and fears of crew and passengers demoralization. In comparison, in year 2000 the overall attacks increased by 65%. The statistics do not include at least 3,000 more incidents involving yachts and smaller boats, and scores of unreported piracy events.

..... Those figures do not include scores of incidents and piracy events that did not occur in international waters, many unreported events due to shipping companies’ policies, and attacks by or known to be connected to terrorism.

Is mere conjecture, assumption and heresay. Estimated by who, and on what basis? What are their credentials? What research did they do to reach these 'estimates'?


Could you please explain why container vessels were considered relatively safe? Is it something in their design, for example the speed they can gain (though I really doubt they can outrun pirates) or something which makes them difficult to board? Or is it rather that one did not expect the pirates to go for container ships as it's not easy to profit on the cargo?

It's a matter of size. Container vessels are incredibly difficult to board because of their enormity.


It is easy to be judge jury and executioner from a comfortable chair. Unless one knows the full situation, it is often better to reserve judgement to the well informed, and if there are none sufficiently informed, investigate further. Neither Naiveté nor rash judgement can fix a situation like the Somalian piracy or piracy in general for that matter, rather they tend to make a small issue become a thermo-nuclear bomb of multiple issues.

Couldn't agree more.

[Emil Miller]

If the above report from Reuters is just one incident that you can't find, one wonders how many others are not on the IMO list which you suggest is the only reliable source for incidents of piracy.


How have they reached their data? If this number is correct:

I do not know the methodology used by the compiler of the report for Global Politics but even allowing for human fallibility or hyperbole there can be no doubt that the problem is becoming a major one internationally.


and there were 263 incidents in 2007 and 293 incidents in 2008 then surely piracy is falling? Last time I checked 445 was more than 293, or am I missing something? And the growth from 2007 to 2008 was 11% not 25%. Journalists are nothing if not bombastic, and I treat your 'source' with great skepticism. And why 1998 as a base year? According to the IMB they've been keeping statistics since at least 1992 and prior to that records were kept by the IMO. .

I am not going to prolong the numbers game on this subject except to say the Disraeli had the right response to statistics. What is beyond doubt is that
innocent people are being murdered and kidnapped in increasing numbers due to piracy as is shown below in an extract from the BBC News Magazine:


The problem of modern-day piracy has been scrutinised by the House of Commons transport select committee, which published a report on Thursday calling for a tough international response to a 168% increase in attacks.

[kasie]

....Note: Don't trust the media. Take it with a grain of salt.

You've only just realised this, Virgil! :rolleyes: and there was me thinking you were a Man of the World... keep up, man, do keep up. :)

(Oh dear, this is the Serious Discussions thread, isn't it - I shall be getting my knuckles rapped for being flippant.)

[TheFifthElement]

FV Ching Fong Hwa 168
(fishing vessel) 15
(fish) Released (one hostage killed) 2007-04-28 not known
2007-11-05 US$1,500,000
The Taiwanese fishing vessel was hijacked on May 28, 2007. The surviving crew of 10 Chinese, two Taiwanese and two Filipino crew members was released on November 5 after spending more than six months in captivity. One Chinese crew member was killed by the pirates on May 28 because the ship's owners failed to meet their ransom demands.
Ah, I see. I was looking into recent events but see this dates back to May 2007. It is, in fact, detailed in the IMB 2007 piracy report, according to which 5 deaths occurred in relation to piracy in 2007. 2 in Somalia (including the one you mentioned above), 1 in Thailand and 2 in Nigeria. Couldn't find the report on Reuters though. This interesting comment was on an 'office of naval intelligence' report:

ONI COMMENT: If this report is genuine and not a deceptive tactic to garner a higher ransom, it would be the first reported case of an intentional hostage killing since the east central coast Somali piracy problem began to emerge in Apr 2005.

Funny, how you say:


I am not going to prolong the numbers game
and then go on to say:

a 168% increase in attacks.

;)

And you didn't post the BBC magazine report.


innocent people are being murdered and kidnapped
yes, innocent people are being murdered and kidnapped all over the place, my point is that piracy is not the pressing issue that the media are currently making it. Sure piracy is something to be concerned about, but all crime is something to be concerned about and whilst we all here debating this and some people are baying for blood there are still innocent people being murdered and/or kidnapped the world over and whilst our eyes are on this one subject they're blind to all the other terrible things that are going on around us that we choose to ignore or the media choose not to draw our attention to.

Don't be a slave to the journalists.

[Emil Miller]

;) And you didn't post the BBC magazine report..

I see no reason to dismiss the comments in the report by people involved in the shipping business as being "conjecture" or "hearsay" especially as the report was produced in 2006 pre-dating the current upsurge of piracy in the Indian Ocean.

Rise of modern-day pirates
By Sean Coughlan
BBC News Magazine


Forget Johnny Depp and cutlasses. Pirates today carry AK-47s and use speed boats to plunder gas tankers and aid ships - with six attacks this week alone.

"Off Acheh, Malacca straits: Armed pirates in an unlit speedboat, blue hull, length about 10 metres. Approached a bulk carrier underway. They tried to board from stern. Raised alarm, crew mustered and activated fire hoses and directed search lights. Noticing crew alertness, pirates aborted boarding."

This isn't a scene from a movie, it's a real-life report of a pirate attack on Monday off the coast of Indonesia.

The pirates are not always foiled. The International Maritime Bureau's piracy monitoring centre has already recorded six attacks this week, including two which succeeded in robbing ships carrying relief to tsunami-affected areas.

"The big worry is that the attacks are getting much more violent," says Andrew Linington, of the maritime officers' union, Numast, which warns about the escalating problem.


"It's moved on from being maritime muggings, where half a dozen robbers would steal something and escape, to something much more organised with much greater use of weaponry."
"They're carrying AK-47s and in a number of cases using rocket-propelled grenades," says Mr Linington. He's amazed that the attacks haven't - yet - resulted in a major disaster.

"We've had cases where a fully-laden oil tanker has sailed down the Malacca Straits, the second busiest shipping route in the world, with no one at the controls because the crew have all been held at gunpoint. We've had gun battles being fought on board gas tankers.

"And what worries us is that if this continues unchecked it's going to be seen as a big advert for terrorists telling them how easy it is to take over a ship."

'Phantom ships'

The problem of modern-day piracy has been scrutinised by the House of Commons transport select committee, which published a report on Thursday calling for a tough international response to a 168% increase in attacks.


And it dispelled the notion that any hint of Hollywood glamour might surround these modern-day pirates.
"We must be clear about what piracy involves: kidnapping, theft, assault, rape, wounding, murder. There is nothing remotely romantic about the perpetrators of these appalling crimes," says the committee chairman, Gwyneth Dunwoody.

The MPs have strongly rejected the government's argument that there is no evidence that piracy could be exploited by terrorists.

"This is the wrong message for the government to send out," says the committee's report, which warns that a ship seized by terrorists could be used for "terrible ends".

It highlights the fears that terrorists could already have "phantom ships" which have been taken in pirate attacks and which have had their identities changed.

There be pirates

But who are these modern-day pirates? Are they anything like the movies?


PIRATE ATTACKS

3,583 pirate attacks since 1992
340 crew or passengers killed
Dangerous areas: Malacca Straits, coast of Somalia, South China Sea, coast of Iraq, Niger Delta
"Colourful pirates don't exist. They're either well-organised gangs, making a lot of money out of it, or opportunistic thieves," says Ian Taylor, editor of Cargo Security International.
Their target might be those on board as much as the cargo, as the current trend is for pirates to seize crews and demand a ransom from their employers. Abducting a crew can yield a $200,000 ransom for a pirate gang in Somalia, says Paul Singer, of Securewest International.

Numast's Andrew Linington says attacks show increasingly sophisticated planning and tactics that suggest military training. The suspicion among seafarers is that in some parts of the world there is only a "fine line between who is a pirate and who is a law enforcer".

Preventing attacks is becoming a bigger challenge for shipping firms. The International Maritime Bureau provides a warning system about suspicious craft - and ships can be kitted out with non-lethal defensive devices.


When the luxury cruise liner Seabourn Spirit was attacked off Somalia last year, the invaders - who shot at the ship with a grenade launcher and machineguns - were repelled by a sonic blaster which delivers an extremely loud and debilitating noise.
Mr Singer, of Securewest International, says it is now commonplace for ships to take on security staff if their course crosses pirate territory - his own company provides teams of ex-servicemen, including former Gurkhas.

UK ships carrying nuclear waste on the Pacific can also carry Atomic Energy Authority police, says the MPs' report.

Arms race

The need for security is a reflection of an increasingly violent threat, says Mr Singer. Attacks, particularly off Somalia, are becoming more elaborate, with the use of bigger ships which can extend the pirates' range.


"When people hear about pirates, they think about Johnny Depp swinging through the rigging, but you really wouldn't want to be on the end of one of these attacks."
Yet there is little appetite for arming merchant crews, not least because of the potential legal complications for crew members who might shoot someone in an attack. And Numast has expressed fears it would only trigger an "arms race with the pirates".

But the House of Commons committee says a clear line is needed on what is permissible in defending shipping, and adds that international co-operation against piracy has been "woefully lacking".

The lack of action reflects an "out of sight, out of mind" attitude, says Numast's Andrew Linington, who believes things would be quite different if pirates started attacking planes.

In the meantime, Johnny Depp's latest outing as a pirate of the Caribbean will ensure that sea-borne raiders still carry an air of romance and derring-do. Avast indeed.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/magazine/5146582.stm

Published: 2006/07/06 10:24:23 GMT

[BienvenuJDC]

Forget Johnny Depp and cutlasses. Pirates today carry AK-47s and use speed boats to plunder gas tankers and aid ships - with six attacks this week alone.


Isn't it amazing how we try to romanticize everything?

[Virgil]

I am not going to prolong the numbers game on this subject except to say the Disraeli had the right response to statistics. What is beyond doubt is that
innocent people are being murdered and kidnapped in increasing numbers due to piracy as is shown below in an extract from the BBC News Magazine:

I quite agree, no matter what the numbers are. Where is the justice? Society requires justice to function or people will not cooperate.


You've only just realised this, Virgil! :rolleyes: and there was me thinking you were a Man of the World... keep up, man, do keep up. :)

(Oh dear, this is the Serious Discussions thread, isn't it - I shall be getting my knuckles rapped for being flippant.)
No you will not, and I have not just come to this conclusion. I have said it before and I don't think people believed me. So I keep saying it, broken record that I am. ;)


Don't be a slave to the journalists.
Yay!! Fifth and I finally agree on something. I could give you a kiss. *muah* I just blew one across the Atlantic. :D

[librarius_qui]

The growing number of ships being raided by armed groups and held for ransom is a flagrant challenge to nations going about their legitimate maritime business. What are the opinions of forum members on how to deal with this unwarranted flouting of international law.

You either
1. avoid waters attacked by pirates
or 2. arm yourself

I think there's no other way.

(Using airplanes isn't viable, because usually what's taken by ship is either too heavy or a larger quantity than a plane can transport ...)

[Sapphire]

I read this in the news (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/04/18/pirates.foiled/index.html?eref=edition) today:

After the Dutch disarmed the pirates, they released them, Shona Lowe, a spokeswoman from the maritime headquarters, told CNN. Because the crew was on a NATO mission, they lacked the jurisdiction to hold them, according to reports.
So basically, a navy ship caught some pirates (freeing 20 hostages) and then just let them go?! I really hope something can be done about this jurisdiction problem to avoid this from happening in the future - if there is not even a punishment when they are caught!

It is frustrating. And it is quite an issue what to do with the captured pirates. Which justice system (in which country) can prosecute them? Which will?

[Emil Miller]

I read this in the news (http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/04/18/pirates.foiled/index.html?eref=edition) today:

So basically, a navy ship caught some pirates (freeing 20 hostages) and then just let them go?! I really hope something can be done about this jurisdiction problem to avoid this from happening in the future - if there is not even a punishment when they are caught!

It is frustrating. And it is quite an issue what to do with the captured pirates. Which justice system (in which country) can prosecute them? Which will?

There are a couple of incidents among those listed on the link where the pirates got their just deserts i.e. were killed. There is one instance where the French miiltary captured the attackers on land by helicopter and they are now in France awaiting sentence for piracy
I think you can see, that the scale of the problem is somewhat greater than some want to believe.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_attacked_by_Somali_pirates

[Sapphire]

I see the scale of the problem, I just have some difficulty with accepting that jurisdiction problems make that some of the captured pirates can just go free.

I think it is odd that either those pirates have to be shot, or caught to be let free again. I read in the link you provide that some have been put to prison, and I wonder why not all can get at least some punishment for what they've done (or where about to do). I get that afterwards, it might be difficult to prove that one certain pirate was there when a ship got taken... But to just let the offenders go because of a jurisdiction problem, that rocks my boat! I really hope they'll find a law to not let that happen again ...

[Emil Miller]

I see the scale of the problem, I just have some difficulty with accepting that jurisdiction problems make that some of the captured pirates can just go free.

I think it is odd that either those pirates have to be shot, or caught to be let free again. I read in the link you provide that some have been put to prison, and I wonder why not all can get at least some punishment for what they've done (or where about to do). I get that afterwards, it might be difficult to prove that one certain pirate was there when a ship got taken... But to just let the offenders go because of a jurisdiction problem, that rocks my boat! I really hope they'll find a law to not let that happen again ...

It isn't so odd when one thinks of the national response to piracy pertaining in those countries that have to deal with the issue. They vary according to the psyche of each country's politicians in relation to international law. This leads to a "treading on eggshells" situation for the 'liberal' countries such as, and particularly, the UK, Holland and Scandinavia as opposed to the more pro-active, and decent, approach of other countries; notably the USA, France and Germany. Whilst most countries pay lip-service to international agreements on sovereignty etc. when the chips are down, as Virgil has already pointed out, innocent people's lives are more important than pieces of paper. Until we stop this stupid liberal nonsense, evil people, not only pirates, will prosper at the expense of the innocent.

[TheFifthElement]

I think you can see, that the scale of the problem is somewhat greater than some want to believe.


It could be said that some want to believe the scale of the problem is bigger than it is. Have you counted the list? I bet it comes to less than 293.


I see the scale of the problem, I just have some difficulty with accepting that jurisdiction problems make that some of the captured pirates can just go free.

Sapphire, in the case you mentioned it is likely that the pirates were caught within Somali national waters in which case it is true that the international vessel would have no right to hold them. If they were tried, they would have to be tried according to Somali law. The problem is that Somalia isn't in a state to deal with it. We could bomb them, or we could help them. I know which option I prefer.

If pirates are caught in international waters, by international agreement, they would be tried under Kenyan jurisdiction.

Sapphire, you expressed an interest in how vessels might protect themselves against pirate attacks. Here's some information, if you're still interested: http://www.ukpandi.com/ukpandi/infopool.nsf/HTML/BMPPiracy and here: http://www.skuld.com/upload/News%20and%20Publications/Publications/Piracy/JWC%202008_002.pdf

[Sapphire]

Thank you for the links :D Definitely still interested.

And that is an eye opener: it is rather the national waters which is a problem, not the international... Regarding punishment after capture that is.

[Virgil]

Sapphire, in the case you mentioned it is likely that the pirates were caught within Somali national waters in which case it is true that the international vessel would have no right to hold them. If they were tried, they would have to be tried according to Somali law. The problem is that Somalia isn't in a state to deal with it. We could bomb them, or we could help them. I know which option I prefer.

If pirates are caught in international waters, by international agreement, they would be tried under Kenyan jurisdiction.

I thought I heard today that the surviving pirate was brought to the States and will be undergoing trial here. Is that accurate?

[Sapphire]

Ok, frontpage of one of the Dutch newspapers today (sorry, could not find an English online link for it). I might have translated a bit too literal, so excuse me when the sentences seem a bit "un-English":

Shipping company Heerema recently started to send their ships to the Golf of Aden with armed security on board. As far as we know this is the first Dutch shipping company who chooses for this solution regarding Somalian piracy. (...) The last years, the Royal Society of Dutch Shipping Companies (KNVR) was against weapons on board, as this would just lead to an escalation of the violence. However, today they stated that extra security is desirable. They plead to take armed mariners on board. (...) Heerema already had on certain occasions in 2008 and 2009 "armed proffesionals" on board (some say Israeli ex-military). (...) The company is registered in Swiss and the ships sail under Panamas flag - the authorities of both countries gave permission to have weapons on board. On Dutch ships, this is prohibited. (...) Member of Parlement Voordewind thinks that soldiers of the EU should be sailing along on commercial ships.
I guess the Shipping Companies are taking their own precautions...
On page 3 was an article about what the law can do in such matters.

Last Saturday, Golf of Aden: 7 pirates attack a Norwegian tanker, but abord this plan when 3 NAVO-fregats respond to an emergency signal. The Canedian warship Winnipeg sends a helicopter to chase the small boat, which fires with a machine gun in front of the bow - no response from the pirates though, they just sail on into the dark. The Winnipeg puts out its lights and sails South, to appear in front of the piracy boat 7 hours later - they surrender. They find only one weapon on board of the little boat, one they forgot to throw out. After this fact is established, the 7 pirates are free to sail on (!!!) - after all, they did not attack a Canadian ship. This raises questions: for why did the Canadians went after that boat in the first place? (...) The international politics has to answer two questions. First, is security at sea a public (government) or private (shipping companies) case? Secondly: does one use the criminal law or war law on the fighting of piracy? (...) Until this day, only France, Kenia, the VS and the Netherlands prosecuted pirates. In the last case, we're talking about 5 suspects whom attacked a ship from the Antilles and were arrested by the Danes.
I think they have some interesting questions there which need to be answered (quickly). I was a bit surprised to read about the pirates that we are prosecuting, I did not know about that. I do wonder though, if one of those ships of Heerema is attacked, would that be a Dutch ship? I mean, they're registered in Swiss and their ship sails with the flag of Panama... :confused: I know why they do it (taxes, crew payment), but will the navy regard theirs as a Dutch ship?

[AimusSage]

There was an expert on Criminal Law on ''De Wereld Draait Door' (dutch TV show) yesterday who had an interesting point. He said that instead of every nation trying to catch the pirates and not being sure what to do with them afterwards, there should be a specialized court for these pirates so they can be tried, similar to a court for war criminals, and he also mentioned the need for stability in the region. There was a decrease in piracy in 2006 due to the 'somewhat' stable government established, but it didn't last and pirates were back with a vengeance.

I would think that the problem with security in that region is that it is inherently unstable due to the various clans, religious beliefs and other social and environmental conditions that have a negative impact. There is widespread corruption there too. The easy thing to say is to go there and install a government but this will not work since the region/ country of Somalia is too divided and surrounded by nations that fare little better, anyone remember the Ethiopian-Eritrean war? That's still a hot zone too. Sending aid to these areas will do little to alleviate the problem, but it will provide the poor and helpless there with much needed supplies, or so you would think. A large portion of those supplies will most likely find its way to the pirates and other militias operating in those areas.

The main issue is that people in these areas must want stability before it will ever get there. Not everyone wants this, as it means giving up power. And although I am sure there are a lot of people with this desire for stability in the region, they all have their own view of what this stability should look like and are unwilling to compromise this view, so on one side you have people that favour democracy, another would rather have a religious state, and yet another would be a dictator. All can provide stability in their own right, but with the other groups also trying for power it will only lead to continuous conflict unless they are able to cooperate. Looking at the world as a whole, I would find that highly unlikely in the foreseeable future.

[Emil Miller]

The extract below is an item from Lloyds List and indicates the effect that increased levels of piracy are having on shipping companies insurance.


Piracy ‘increases kidnap and ransom premiums tenfold’

Tuesday 21 April 2009

SHRINKING investment returns,

dwindling premium levels and the slump in world shipping markets are challenge enough for shipping and their insurers without having to factor in piracy.
Broker Aon earlier this month warned that kidnap and ransom premiums have this year increased tenfold as piracy escalates.

AimusSage's summing up of the state of play in Somalia shows the position in a nutshell and there seems little that can be done to alleviate the situation on land. Were it not for the Muslim element, it might have been possible to invade and occupy the country under UN mandate but, even if the UN were to agree with the necessity for occuption, it would require Nato to police the occupation, as the UN were worse than useless in the Balkans conflict and it took NATO bombing missions to make the warring factions see reason. However, many muslims worldwide would portray any such occupation as an attack on their religion, and the UN would have another Iraq on its hands.

Given that little, if anything, can be done to by way of controlling the overall situation on land, the need for shippping nations to be protected at sea is paramount and requires the right of countries to protect their shipping at ALL COSTS; which means the use of all necessary force both at sea and on land; TREATIES OF SOVEREIGNTY NOTWITHSTANDING.

An example of this is given below:

The MY Le Ponant was seized in the Gulf of Aden. The French-owned luxury yacht had no passengers on board, but there were 30 crew members: one Cameroonian, six Filipinos, 22 French, and one Ukrainian. The FS Commandant Bouan, a French D'Estienne d'Orves-class aviso, and the HMCS Charlottetown, a Canadian Halifax-class frigate, were dispatched to the yacht. On April 12 the crew and the ship were released, apparently after the owner, CMA CGM, paid a ransom. After the crew was released, French soldiers tracked the pirates, who were then on land. According to the French military a sniper in a helicopter disabled the engine of a car transporting the pirates, while another helicopter landed and captured six pirates and recovered some ransom money. On April 13 the six appeared in a French court in Paris and were charged with, among other things, hostage-taking, hijacking, and theft.

[TheFifthElement]

I thought I heard today that the surviving pirate was brought to the States and will be undergoing trial here. Is that accurate?

I don't know Virgil, though it does kind of make some sense. As I understand it the agreement to prosecute 'offenders' in the Kenyan courts is a fairly recent one. In the case of the Maersk Alabama it could easily be argued that at the time the pirate was captured he was on a US flagged ship and therefore under US jurisdiction. I believe that the pirate, at the time, was on the stolen lifeboat of the Alabama. It would make sense to me to allow the country in which the attacked vessel is registered to act as jurisdiction in the case of piracy on the high seas. I suppose where it gets sticky is the question of whether a foreign nation has the right to take Somali nationals without seeking extradition from the Somali government; in the absence of a legal channel through which these issues can be addressed then any other action would seem to me to be tantamount to state sponsored kidnapping and if that's not okay for the pirates it shouldn't be okay for the state, however powerful, either. Or that's my opinion anyway. It may be that the Somali government has subscribed to their citizens being tried in Kenya when caught on the high seas, but I'm speculating on that point. If I dig anything up I'll let you know.

Interestingly, looking at the IMB 2008 piracy report, a large number of successful attacks were against vessels which have slightly less reputable flags. Not the Maersk Alabama, obviously. It may be that the standards of upkeep/staffing and so on of those ships naturally makes them more vulnerable to attack. In the case of the Alabama it is likely that they didn't perceive that they were vulnerable to attack. Perhaps the pirates got lucky? Who knows.

There's also been some suggestion that the attacks against fishing vessels have been motivated by alleged overfishing by foreign vessels in Somali waters, and illegal dumping of waste. Whether this is true or not I'm not sure, and either way the end doesn't justify the means; but it may be that this whole thing began with a grain of justification and, sadly, like all these types of event spiralled into the hands of career criminals out to make an 'easy' buck.

I also heard, and again I can't verify the truth of this, that one of the Somali 'pirates' killed in a recent attack by French troops, was a 14 year old boy. If that is true then the 'shoot first, ask questions later' policy troubles me all the more.


Piracy ‘increases kidnap and ransom premiums tenfold’

Tuesday 21 April 2009

SHRINKING investment returns,

dwindling premium levels and the slump in world shipping markets are challenge enough for shipping and their insurers without having to factor in piracy.
Broker Aon earlier this month warned that kidnap and ransom premiums have this year increased tenfold as piracy escalates.
Brian, the situation isn't quite as clear cut as the report suggests. At present the risk of piracy is automatically included in a marine policy although in the Hull market they're looking to break out the piracy element and make this part of the war risk instead (along with insurgency and terrorism and strikes and so on). In so doing this enables insurers to flex the rate based on the perceived risk, so premiums are only likely to increase if the vessel is transiting a high risk area of the world, and premiums are likely to be assessed based on the risk management capability of the shipping line, taking into account factors such as flag, type of vessel, and any anti-piracy protection the vessels have.

Kidnap and ransom is more likely to be covered by the P&I Club, but P&I Clubs are less of an 'insurer' in the typical sense in that they are non-profit making. Their members contributions go to cover all P&I insured events that the members suffer. Rates could equally go up if the shipping line incurred greater liabilities because of poor management, adverse weather conditions and so on. If the investment income isn't paying off, and that seems to be the case at the moment, then insurance premiums go up piracy or no piracy.