MarEx Mailbag: Reader Response to Last Weeks Editorial
MarEx readers weigh in with some pointed opinions on last week’s lead editorial, entitled, Piracy off the Coast of Somalia: No Easy Answers.
The Mailbag was heavy this week. In last week’s edition of the MarEx e-newsletter, our lead editorial, entitled, Piracy off the Coast of Somalia: No Easy Answers, talked about the ongoing situation off the coast of Somalia. The situation off the coast of this chaotic African country has, of course, reached a critical stage. There have been many suggestions as to how to combat these criminals, the efforts haven’t yet appreciably stopped the problem. The particular inability of the IMO and UN to organize anything better also received the sharp end of our comments. MarEx readers had plenty to say, as well. Read the editorial by clicking HERE. You can also read what MarEx readers thought about the subject:
Dear Mr. Keefe,
I am an ex British merchant marine 1st class engineer officer, and now own and operate a full service marine survey company in Florida.
I have been reading all kinds of op-eds, magazine articles, listening to ‘experts’ and watching them on television, all with their own special high tech, low tech, fanciful, and sometimes outright stupid, answers as to how to combat the piracy off Somalia.
What has become of the old axiom, “There is safety in numbers”? Why has no-one seriously looked at or suggested sailing the east coast of Africa and the Red sea in escorted convoys?
This worked in the 2nd world war, and with today’s technology available to various navies it could be improved upon and introduced such that the pirates would be detected before they got close to a convoy, and with deployment of helicopters from the escort vessels could be deterred from attacking, and if continued towards the convoy would quite literally be outnumbered and outgunned at every turn.
Each convoy could be protected by several warships of a multinational navy, with many nations providing escort vessels such that no single nation would be carrying a majority of the burden of protection.
I see that the French and Intertanko are now speaking of this being a new option: I think it should be seriously considered.
Convoys could be established south of the Somali coast for north bound, east off the coast of Oman for South bound or transiting the Red Sea coast of Somalia, or at the south end of the Suez canal for transiting the Red Sea to points outside the Red Sea.
As have stated, it worked before, so why not use the system again instead of trying to protect individual vessels. Surely this would also be cost effective?
Ralph Sugden
Caribbean Marine and P&I USA Inc
Editor’s remarks: This letter carries a common theme, echoed by others. The solution won’t be cheap, but then, when we are talking about saving lives, too. What price can be put on that. Read on:
Greetings Joe,
NPR recently interviewed the US Navy Admiral responsible for the waters around the Arabian Peninsula. I was a bit surprised when the good Admiral stated that fighting pirates and protecting merchant shipping was not part of his "job description". So much for the 'Shores of Tripoli' tradition. In fact, for merchant seamen, that may be a good thing.
The Somali pirates have been very smart in not harming the crews of the ships they capture. I just returned from nearby Eritrea, I can attest to how sophisticated dirt-poor Third World people can be in this age of satellite TV and the Internet. The Somali pirates are astutely levering the public relations value of the crews' safety in their asymmetrical confrontation with militarily powerful nations. The pirates have placed a value on the lives of the crews. In contrast, the Indian Navy sank a Thai fishing boat that may not have been the pirate 'mother ship' it was alleged to be. I suspect the families of the Thai sailors who died would have preferred their loved-ones fates to have been in the hands of the Somali pirates.
The current pirate situation has me flashing back to the Mayaguez incident and the Persian Gulf tanker war in the 1980's. The Cambodians who seized the Mayaguez had abandoned the ship and freed the crew before the US military responded. Thanks to the 'fog of war', 41 Marines and Sailors died and 50 were wounded in the pointless attack ordered by President Ford. Secretary of State Kissinger even stated that the lives of the Mayaguez crew were less important than the symbolism of recapturing that tired old rustbucket. I was OS on a US tanker at the time and I will never forget Henry Kissinger’s' policy statement on the value of merchant seamen.
In 1987, I was a mate on a small tanker chartered to the US Navy. We spent 20 days of each month in Subic Bay, babysitting our load of jet fuel. This was the height of the Persian Gulf tanker war and the Navy was all ramped up for action. The local Navy Seal detachment used our ship to practice boarding and recapturing a ship seized by Iranians or anybody else the US might be mad at. After one of these SEAL drills, I asked the OIC what a captured crew should do when the SEALS board the ship. With an ironic grin, the OIC said that the SEALS would kill everybody and sort out the corpses later. Their only goal is to recapture the ship and saving crew members was not part of their job description. Another US government policy statement I won't forget.
So, to you lads and ladies of the merchant marine who may be transiting the area around the Horn of Africa: keep a sharp lookout for those Somali pirates and pray to God the US government doesn't send your own Navy to save the day.
Regards,
Name withheld by Request
Editor’s Remarks: This individual didn’t want to be identified, nevertheless, he/she has written in before and usually has something worthwhile to add. But, I do like “boots on the ground” stories. Read on for another view:
Joe,
Regarding "It was only a matter of time; you just knew it. Overstating the obvious, IMO Secretary-General Efthimios E. Mitropoulos last week called for a coordinated and cohesive response ...", is kind of like calling the exterminator after you've found out your home is infested with termites. Oh well, at least gasoline is cheaper, right?
Regards,
John Rice
Editor’s remarks: Short and to the point, that one. Here’s another:
J Keefe:
Why not run 15 ship convoys with one military ship with a helicopter from one country one week, and another counties military ship the next week. This would help with
foreign relations, and if the military ships surveillance is as good as it says it should be able to pick up a surface target and deploy a helicopter in seconds, and blast it out
of the water. The piracy should slow to a halt. If it's about money think about the dollars of cargo, lives if you can put a amount on that, and the ship or the loss of the ship.
Hylas Twiford
Editor’s Remarks: Another fan of the convoy method – which may yet come to pass as a valid solution. Will it be practicable as a long term solution and for how many routes and how many vessels? All unanswered questions. One last letter follows:
Mr. Keefe,
International Trade is not my niche in maritime but I have a wee bit of a security background and I am curious about something….
• When exactly did mariners loose the right and ability to defend themselves?
A basic premise of security is to make yourself a hard enough target that the bad guys go pick on someone else. If the vessels plying their trade in areas known to be hostile were to spend a wee bit of time training a core of their crew and equipping them with basic arms then it is my opinion that eventually the hot spots of the world would run out of pirates…
If we can send people to two weeks of school for GMDSS or two weeks of accelerated Medical Training, why can’t we send them to a week or two of hands on Security & Vessel Defense training?
If we can spend over $100k on a radar and over $25k on a system to call for help, why can’t we spend $50k on a few small arms capable of making a pirate think twice before attacking an oil tanker?
For a few weeks training time and a small investment in hardware, one could ready a merchant vessel capable of mounting a formidable defense…for far less overall cost than having warship escorts and dedicated security forces.
Is there some international law that has rendered merchant seamen defenseless? And if so, the pirates are not abiding by it…so why should we?
And PLEASE don’t tell me that the crews of half billion dollar ships carrying two million barrels of oil can’t be trusted with small arms.
Name withheld Upon Request
Editor’s Remarks: This is an interesting letter, with some good points made, I think. However, I have to tell you that I am the very last person you need to be trusting with firearms. And, I don’t think I’d be comfortable employing them on a commercial platform. Maybe I’m not a good candidate for STCW compliance, after all. As I said in my editorial last week, however, there are no easy answers.