Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Modern Pirates

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Eurocap Nestor

    Originally posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Quite easily if you haven't an established navy who have to fight for every crumb from the table of the DF budget.

    Given he is a member here he may even drop in and give us an insight.
    The new operations advisor on Maritime security will need a reasonable qualified group of seamen that can be integrated into a unit with abilities in communication, engineering, and also a seagoing interdiction/ detention unit(s). The Port of Mogadishu is operationally managed, under fee, by a Turkish consortium. The Somali maritime Agency/ Coast Guard needs to obtain a secure port area ( Base ) for their vessels and appropriate billeting, training, and HQ areas with closed secure access.

    Comment


    • Very presumptuous to say that it's ended, in abeyance perhaps due to the massive international maritime presence in the area. Take that away (and there are already noises that 2018 is the last year of EU NAVFOR ATALANTA) and the easy profits associated with piracy will be far too attractive.

      03 Oct 2016 there was a suspicious approach in the Red Sea just north of Bab al-Mandeb as detailed on the IMB website:

      ICC FraudNet's Global Annual Report 2022. Read about developments in investigations, insolvency related misconduct, and the use of innovative technology to assist in discovery and court proceedings.


      Potential pirates were dissuaded by PCASP aboard but owners/operators are beginning to question the need (read: cost) for the latter given the 'low' threat.

      The drivers (abject poverty, lack of alternate employment, easy access to weapons, presence of tribal warlords, weak national administrations) are still there so, given the right conditions, a-pirating they shall go again.

      Comment


      • Some protection of Somali fishing grounds from foreigners in the absence of a Somali ability to do so, which was part of the reason for some to branch out into piracy, might help too.

        Comment


        • Spoke too soon


          Somali pirates launched their first attacked on a merchant vessel in more than two and a half years, the European Union’s counter piracy operation Naval Force Somalia (EU NAVFOR) has confirmed. ...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
            Yep, I was aware of this one from elsewhere when I put up my earlier post and now it's open source. The one good thing that's coming out of this is that owners/operators are getting some hard evidence of how effective a professional PCASP Team can be, perhaps they'll continue to stump up the funds required to have them aboard for a little bit longer.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Medsailor View Post
              Yep, I was aware of this one from elsewhere when I put up my earlier post and now it's open source. The one good thing that's coming out of this is that owners/operators are getting some hard evidence of how effective a professional PCASP Team can be, perhaps they'll continue to stump up the funds required to have them aboard for a little bit longer.
              Is there still difficulty with Rules of Engagement and carriage of arms and ammunition eg. when ship with PCASP arrives in port armed. Are they under command to anybody aboard or ashore? I presume the Flag State of the armed ship is ultimately required to carry all cans, including pirate casualties.
              It seems up to 50% of ships on passage in hot areas have Private Contracted Armed Security Personnel. Available teams must be in thousands and need to be controlled and procedure trained by a body equivalent to the old DEMS or an IMO Ship Defence Organisation.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                Is there still difficulty with Rules of Engagement and carriage of arms and ammunition eg. when ship with PCASP arrives in port armed. Are they under command to anybody aboard or ashore? I presume the Flag State of the armed ship is ultimately required to carry all cans, including pirate casualties.
                It seems up to 50% of ships on passage in hot areas have Private Contracted Armed Security Personnel. Available teams must be in thousands and need to be controlled and procedure trained by a body equivalent to the old DEMS or an IMO Ship Defence Organisation.
                Ultimately it's down to the Flag State to set the conditions for the use of PCASP aboard. These can range from the number/type of weapons used to the qualifications required by the individual personnel as well as the certification of the company. The Flag State can also limit their use to areas considered by insurers to be high risk.

                IMO have issued guidance (http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/Pr...x#.WCGkBtIrLIU) on this matter but a number of member states strongly object to PCASP in principle and thus binding legislation is not an option.

                As for the embarkation/disembarkation of PCASP and their associated weapons, most Flag States just say 'in accordance with the regulations of the Port State'. Some ports are easier than others.

                There is a real wide range of quality, from fly-by-night organisations to high-quality companies with ISO certification and top-notch personnel and procedures. The problem is that, AFAIK, no Flag State is actively inspecting how their regulations/guidance are being implemented at sea.

                Comment


                • IMO have issued guidance (http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/Pr...x#.WCGkBtIrLIU) on this matter but a number of member states strongly object to PCASP in principle and thus binding legislation is not an option.

                  As for the embarkation/disembarkation of PCASP and their associated weapons, most Flag States just say 'in accordance with the regulations of the Port State'. Some ports are easier than others.

                  There is a real wide range of quality, from fly-by-night organisations to high-quality companies with ISO certification and top-notch personnel and procedures. The problem is that, AFAIK, no Flag State is actively inspecting how their regulations/guidance are being implemented at sea.[/QUOTE]

                  Much as I thought. It sounds too much like a gunslinger rides into town and he may just also be a homicidal maniac , not under control. It needs to be regularised and brought under a Maritime Alliance attached to an EU/UN mandate using only National trained serving personnel, directed and controlled by an O I/C of at least Sergeant/ Petty Officer Rank using agreed ROE's.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post

                    Much as I thought. It sounds too much like a gunslinger rides into town and he may just also be a homicidal maniac , not under control. It needs to be regularised and brought under a Maritime Alliance attached to an EU/UN mandate using only National trained serving personnel, directed and controlled by an O I/C of at least Sergeant/ Petty Officer Rank using agreed ROE's.
                    EUNAVFOR Somalia was deploying AVPDs not sure if they still are

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                      IMO have issued guidance (http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/Pr...x#.WCGkBtIrLIU) on this matter but a number of member states strongly object to PCASP in principle and thus binding legislation is not an option.

                      As for the embarkation/disembarkation of PCASP and their associated weapons, most Flag States just say 'in accordance with the regulations of the Port State'. Some ports are easier than others.

                      There is a real wide range of quality, from fly-by-night organisations to high-quality companies with ISO certification and top-notch personnel and procedures. The problem is that, AFAIK, no Flag State is actively inspecting how their regulations/guidance are being implemented at sea.
                      Much as I thought. It sounds too much like a gunslinger rides into town and he may just also be a homicidal maniac , not under control. It needs to be regularised and brought under a Maritime Alliance attached to an EU/UN mandate using only National trained serving personnel, directed and controlled by an O I/C of at least Sergeant/ Petty Officer Rank using agreed ROE's.[/QUOTE]

                      After what happened to the two Italian Marines who were arrested by Indian authorities and the impact of that on a whole range of issues, including Fincantieri's bid to provide propulsion for the new Indian CV, states are a bit leery of providing service personnel.

                      AVPDs were used by EUNAVFOR ATALANTA including our guys at one time but these were assigned solely to World Food Programme contracted ships running into Mogadishu. Some countries did provide national elements to ships under their flag under purely internal arrangements.

                      PCASPs can be an excellent solution and, to be fair, I would say that the majority of companies provide a professional service. Much also depends on the Master of the vessel who retains overall responsibility but I think that the real solution is to provide hard rules at IMO level and a programme of auditing similar to that applied for ISPS. Fact of the matter is that with the sheer number of vessels out there, most medium-size European navies could spend all their time doing nothing but AVPDs if military personnel became mandatory. I understand the reaction of uniformed or ex-uniformed personnel to the use of armed civilians but we've done the same with banks, cash vans, airports and a whole range of other things. The days (and budgets) of States providing cradle to grave security are long gone.

                      Comment


                      • Also do they stay on board for the duration of the voyage?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                          Also do they stay on board for the duration of the voyage?
                          Given that ship operators pay by the day and many times their Flag States only permit the issue of weapons from the secure storage in high risk areas, the answer is generally no. As pointed out before, not all ports are user-friendly when it comes to embarking/disembarking of PCASPs and their weapons. One solution that some of the larger companies have come up with are Armoury Ships (http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-floa...eas-1422934573) which provide storage for weapons and temporary accomodation for PCASPs before they embark aboard the ship they are detailed to protect.

                          This is not an easy topic and administrations have wrestled with the various problems for some time. This is one way of going about the legislative side - http://justiceservices.gov.mt/Downlo...emid=24474&l=1

                          Comment


                          • Piracy deterrant actions

                            This is not an easy topic and administrations have wrestled with the various problems for some time. This is one way of going about the legislative side - http://justiceservices.gov.mt/Downlo...emid=24474&l=1[/QUOTE]

                            The above mentioned Document issued by the Maltese Government is apt and pertinent. A draft ROE produced for a Command and Staff Course followed proportionate responses. If a craft or someone on it fired a shot directly at your vessel, you issued a verbal warning by all/any means. If a second shot was fired you replied with a close warning shot. If a third shot was fired you replied with sufficient power to eradicate the threat and neutralise the platform being used. Attempts at boarding would be treated using water cannon and firepower where necessary, including sinking the attacking craft.

                            Piracy attack needs to be covered with more clarity by UNCLOS and not alone by Flag States, to include the High Seas elements.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                              This is not an easy topic and administrations have wrestled with the various problems for some time. This is one way of going about the legislative side - http://justiceservices.gov.mt/Downlo...emid=24474&l=1
                              The above mentioned Document issued by the Maltese Government is apt and pertinent. A draft ROE produced for a Command and Staff Course followed proportionate responses. If a craft or someone on it fired a shot directly at your vessel, you issued a verbal warning by all/any means. If a second shot was fired you replied with a close warning shot. If a third shot was fired you replied with sufficient power to eradicate the threat and neutralise the platform being used. Attempts at boarding would be treated using water cannon and firepower where necessary, including sinking the attacking craft.

                              Piracy attack needs to be covered with more clarity by UNCLOS and not alone by Flag States, to include the High Seas elements.[/QUOTE]

                              I would argue that UNCLOS is not the best place for more clarity given that (a) its a strategic rather than a tactical document and (b) amending it requires the consensus of all parties which would be a stretch. It already provides a very robust basis in that it provides for universal jurisdiction on the high seas in regard to acts of piracy. With the exception of acts of slavery in the same legislation, this is a unique and powerful jurisdictional nexus that has not been achieved anywhere else nor in relation to any other crime, not even drug trafficking or terrorism.
                              Perhaps a more globally-aligned version of BMP 4 (http://eunavfor.eu/wp-content/upload...pt_5_20111.pdf) would be the best way to go.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X