By The hostage taking of Korean sailors continues off the coast of Somalia:
A Japanese freighter, whose crewmen include five South Koreans, was hijacked by an armed group in waters off Somalia on late Saturday (Seoul time), South Korea’s foreign ministry said Sunday.
The 20,000-ton cargo ship named Chemstar Venus was abducted 96 miles east of the Gulf of Aden in Somalia at 6:10 p.m., the ministry said.
Of the ship’s 23 crewmen, five were South Korean and 18 were Filipino, it added. [Yonhap]
I just don’t understand why large boats like this do not equip themselves with a .50 cal a sink these idiot pirates on these skiffs?
3:33 pm on November 16th, 2008 1
Let's not forget that kidnapping Koreans is probably seen as lucrative since the Korean Government is known to whip out the check book for hostages. I bet they pay in US dollars too, must suck at the current exchange rate.
As far as a gun on board, I don't see why a private ship could not have a weapon of some sort strictly for self defense. It seems captains of ships on the high seaa have a great deal of leeway and autonomy. Of course, I'm no expert on maritime law.
International maritime law states that "any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken." Seems that means if you run over them, it's their fault.
I know some cruise ships have defensive weapons and people to man them.
8:45 pm on November 16th, 2008 2
I’m neither a lawyer nor a squid, but I think that it is written into some sort of convention or laws of war, that if they were to mount a .50-cal, then the ship would have to be declared a warship on Korea’s list of declared warships, it would have to have an actual naval officer in charge, it would no longer be protected as a noncombatant merchant vessel, yadda…yadda…yadda, and that’s why so many pirates have their way with so many merchant vessels off East Africa.
10:06 pm on November 16th, 2008 3
In reality…shipping companies are more worried about insurance claims than the lives of their crew…
Check out the link for some of the more ridiculus suggested methods of defending their selves:
http://www.icc-ccs.org/
The US has attempted to patrol various piracy prone areas, but due to the non-cooperation by neighboring countries, this effort has never gotten off the ground. PMCs, such as Blackwater, have even suggested that the anti-piracy endeavor be privatized, which I agree with, but to this day only token and highly in-effective efforts have been under-taken, resulting in the status quo that remains.
10:42 pm on November 16th, 2008 4
Cruise Ships are an entirely different ball game…ever wonder why you DO NOT hear anything about their security?
That should tell you volumes…
4:06 am on November 17th, 2008 5
I remember seeing something a while back about a cruise ship that successfully defended itself against pirates with a directed sound weapon. I can understand how a .50 cal might cause legal issues, but you'd think a non-lethal acoustic weapon should be fine. Of course, cruise ships have more budget and more reason to avoid piracy, but you'd think the value of a ship and cargo would justify the expense.
12:43 pm on November 17th, 2008 6
JoeC"
I like your line of thinking…
"The ONLY good terrorist is a DEAD terrorist."
The answer lays in commissioning a private organization to establish a small maritime presence with approprite countermeasures.
12:47 pm on November 17th, 2008 7
How about putting a nice hole in the oil tanker once it is towed to shore and completely devastate their shoreline? Then let the locals take care of the pirates.
12:55 pm on November 17th, 2008 8
I'm sure the wiser seafaring powers of the world will find a suitable solution from antiquity once the proverbial straw breaks the camel's back.
1:07 pm on November 17th, 2008 9
US Constitution article #8: Powers of Congress; To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas and offenses against the law of nations.
2:56 pm on November 17th, 2008 10
Congress–a lethargic whoremonger so overwhelmed with pork barrel partisan politics that it is incapable of exercising its Constitutional powers.
7:30 pm on November 17th, 2008 11
Now they have captured a Saudi supertanker.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7733482.stm
Just when I think they’ve gone too far, they get bolder and take a steep further. When they took the Ukrainian ship with Russian arms I was expecting to see a demonstration of Russia’s maritime special ops capability. That didn’t happen. But, this supertanker situation calls for a response on a much higher level.
My perspective on this comes from experience on a much more modest level. I worked on a non-combatant ship that would frequently transit the Straits of Malacca. Before Somalia, those Straits were where people thought about when they talked about modern day piracy. Anti-piracy for us was non-lethal defensive measures. But we weren’t the type of ship those pirates would likely go after. Their MO was to capture ships, valuables, and or crew that was easily movable and concealable on the many islands in that area. The controlling governments of the area; Singapore, Indonesia, and Malaysia have vested interests in protecting international transit though that area. They just have difficulty controlling the activity within the many islands between them. Since then, as far as I know, they have done much better at managing combines forces security operations and reports of piracy in that area have greatly reduced.
Somalia is different. Those attacks seem to employ a higher level of military tactics and much heavier weapons. They are also free to hold up in the badlands around Somalia and Kenya where there is no government control. It’s not like they can hide the supertanker or any of the other large ships they are capturing. These areas are safe havens controlled by militias.
So, what to do about them? I have a few suggestions. Money is where these group’s loyalties begin and end. Starting with the supertanker, Saudi Arabia should not pay a bounty for the crew and ship itself, but should offer a high bounty for all the leaders of any militia groups that has them.
You will probably also see much greater international pressure on Kenya and what stands for a Somali government to come to terms and purge all non-aligned (rogue) militia groups.
6:07 am on November 18th, 2008 12
CalmSeas paraphrasing JoeC:
“The ONLY good terrorist is a DEAD terrorist.”
Are they terrorists or criminals? They don’t seem to be creating terror to achieve any political goal.
This media-perpetuated lack of distinction which brands everyone a terrorist has allowed the American government to abuse the anti-terrorism laws.
Putting peaceful protesters on the no-fly list and using Patriot Act provisions to silence whistle blowers would be examples that come to mind.
12:04 pm on November 18th, 2008 13
#12:
The FBI defines terrorism as:
The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.
Criminal/Terrorist, or somewhere in between, you decide…but I would happily put a bullet between each & everyone of their eyes.
12:05 pm on November 18th, 2008 14
#11:
Couldn't agree more…
12:24 pm on November 18th, 2008 15
Somali Pirates Keep Hundreds of Hostages in Pirate City of Eyl
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,454124,00.htm…
12:32 pm on November 18th, 2008 16
CalmSeas,
"The FBI defines terrorism as: "
Exactly. Almost everyone becomes a terrorist. The teacher who coerces the student to study for the social objective of a better educated population; the peaceful demonstrator who pushes aside a barricade to protest government abuse; etc.
12:49 pm on November 18th, 2008 17
http://www.icc-ccs.org/index.php?option=com_fabri…
2:03 pm on November 18th, 2008 18
Oh yeah!
2:18 pm on November 18th, 2008 19
#20:
To digress from the subject matter and attempt to divert the thread into a socio-political soap box for the justification of arguing about what is, or is not an act of Terrorism, and to relate it to "Teachers & Protesters", when the party in question has "Pirated" over 80 vessels this year alone, and has an estimated "100 Hostages" in their possession…is not only ludicrous, but a huge waste of brain cells.
The Somalia Warlords are Criminals and Muslims…they have ties to Al Qaeda, but do we have proof that they are directly involved in transferring the $$$ gained from piracy & KFR? No, not at our level at this point. Is piracy a well-known avenue of gaining funds to support Al Qaeda? Yes & very documented. http://www.icc-ccs.org/
You want to argue semantics while these Clowns continue to commit their acts of piracy with impunity…knock yourself out.
I'll continue to to keep abreast of the situation, come up with ideas & proposals to solve the piracy problem…and continue to sharpen my bayonet.
3:36 pm on November 18th, 2008 20
I also think the word "terrorist" has lost its distinction. According to Rumsfeld, terrorist = insurgents = radicals. Is there a difference? Should their be a difference? Apparently we have decided we can come to terms with insurgents, i.e. the Sunni Awakening, but no one would ever suggest coming to terms with terrorists.
The terrorist label can also be applied to both sides of an political or ideological argument. Was the Israeli Irgun a freedom fighting organization or were they terrorists.
I think the motivation for the incident is important. Kind of like the difference between a kidnapper and a hostage taker.
When those Korean Christian missionaries were taken in Afghanistan last year, the Taliban claimed political terms for their release. They demanded the withdrawal of troops and the release of prisoners. Then they were hostage takers and I would consider that more an act of terrorism. But in the end, they released the remaining captives after a ransom was paid. If their initial intent was to get a ransom payment, then they would be kidnappers and I would call that act a crime.
I said of the Somali pirates, 'Money is where these group’s loyalties begin and end.' I believe that their acts are kidnappings and not hostage taking. I would call them more criminals than terrorists.
7:35 pm on November 18th, 2008 21
Terrorism or not, methinks it’s time to send in Cobus Claassens.
7:56 pm on November 18th, 2008 22
#16: “…Almost everyone becomes a terrorist? The teacher, the peaceful demonstrator???”
You do realize that we are discussing “Criminal Acts” taking place on the high seas…don’t you?
Kool Aid threads are on another website…
8:38 pm on November 18th, 2008 23
CalmSeas,
To intelligently discuss something, a consistent and correct framework of reference terms is required.
One of the reasons America is currently doing poorly in fighting “terrorists”, is the pop-concept of a “terrorist” and their motivations is greatly removed from reality.
If stopping piracy is approached as terrorism, or what the FBI arbitrarily defines as terrorism for other political reasons, rather than as a crime for economic gain, it will be yet another endless war where we fight an endless stream of incidents without solving the underlying problems.
This is pushed as a KoolAid concept for those who gain from the situation.
1:01 am on November 19th, 2008 24
I see, CalmSeas.
Clearly understanding what we are up against and using that information to formulate a response which works both in the short and long terms is semantics. O.K.
It's better give the enemy an emotionally-charged (if inaccurate) label, then sharpen our bayonets and charge in guns-a-blazin' based on ignorance and misconceptions.
Blackhawk Down comes to mind.
After mistakenly identifying the enemy, reflecting on the difference between terrorists and bandits, and why the distinction is important, is "not only ludicrous, but a huge waste of brain cells."
Very well.
There is no argument here that these pirates need to be stopped immediately and that rather Draconian techniques are acceptable, if legal and appropriate.
But, for long-term success, there is a problem if our policy and methods in dealing with them are based on them being terrorists rather than bandits.
There is also a problem if the voting public is misled; especially if it is being done to keep the myth of global terrorism alive so that more intrusive and restrictive laws can be pushed through.
You appear to be a member of the voting public which has been misled to believe that every criminal is a terrorist.
So be it.
Now, as an added thought, I wonder why, with the incredible sums of money that have been spent on "anti-terrorism", the militarization of our law enforcement and the creation of a navy capable of fighting major wars on multiple fronts, we are unable to use this as a training exercise to stop a handful of third-world thugs sitting in a brightly-painted metal box surrounded by a 450 mile radius of flat water under constant surveillance.
8:44 am on November 19th, 2008 25
JAFO
I am sure the naval forces providing a safe corridor of passage are using all available assets. The Indian ocean is some 28 million square miles (albeit not all in the pirates zone of operations.) Our surveillance assets are also being used to the max in places like Iraq and Afganistan. Even if some have been directed to be used off somalia, there would be thousands of boats daily needing to be individually identified and investigated. Currently the plan is to provide a safe corridor for shipping. The Saudi tanker from what I understand was outside of that corridor. I don’t know what you mean by “vast sums of money” since our military expenditures (fighting two wars) are at historically low rates.