It’s been troubling to watch US warships “monitor” the status of foreign flagged vessels seized by Somali pirates and brought within territorial waters, where they are, theoretically at least, subject to local law enforcement rather than high seas piracy suppression. Theoretically, because Somalia has no functioning government or security services with which to prosecute the law enforcement issue.
But now the pirates have seized a US-flagged merchant ship, which ought to make things a good deal simpler:
A U.S.-flagged cargo ship that routinely works under contract to the Department of Defense and its all-American crew were hijacked today by pirates operating off the Horn of Africa.
The crew of 20 is believed to be safe and the vessel is heading toward the coast of Somalia, maritime officials said.
The early-morning attack of the Danish-owned cargo ship occurred about 240 nautical miles southeast of the Somali port city of Eyl in the Indian Ocean, according to U.S. naval officials.The ship’s owner, Norfolk, Va.-based Maersk Line Ltd., a subsidiary of Denmark’s A.P. Moller-Maersk, is a longtime Defense Department shipping contractor, operating at times with top security clearance.
But the hijacked vessel, the Maersk Alabama, was not sailing under a Defense Department contract at the time of the attack, according to Lt. Nathan Christensen, a spokesman from the U.S. 5th Fleet in Bahrain.
A Maersk spokeswoman in Copenhagen said the ship was carrying food and “relief aid,” but she did not know the final destination of the cargo.
The attack marks a rare hijacking of a U.S.-operated ship in Africa, where piracy has been surging along Somalia’s coast and in the Gulf of Aden.
“Every indication is that this is the first time a U.S.-flagged ship has been successfully seized by pirates,” Christensen said.
It’s quite possible that I’ve misremembered my law of the sea, but I seem to recall that the US reserves an inherent right and obligation to lend assistance to US-flagged vessels and their mariners unlawfully seized, regardless of their inshore or at sea status.
I guess we’ll soon see.
For broader piracy coverage, please see Eagle Speak, who has been all over this issue from start, and has the added advantages of being both a naval officer and a lawyer. Versus a knuckle-dragging strike fighter guy who just wants the coordinates of stuff that ought to be blown up.
Update: Putting the “marine” back in “merchant marines“:
A Defense Department official said the American crew was back in charge of a hijacked cargo ship off the coast of Somalia and had one pirate detained.
The fate of the other pirates who had been reported to have been on the ship was not known, the official said.
Probably trying to pass his swim qual.
This will certainly be a test of the Obama admin… I know what I wish our gov’t would do but I have no clue what they will do.
If they let this domino fall by allowing a ransom then we are into a whole other ball game.
Established policy including domestic kidnapping has always been no ransom. Somehow, I bet this changes. I don’t have a lot of faith in the current administration sending in the SEALs and killing every last pirate, surrender or not.
Byron – Neither do I.
I am reminded of the Israelis that took the Antebi (sp) airport to rescue passengers on an El Al flight. They did have casualties but… the bigger statement was that you WILL NOT take Israeli flights.
I don’t think the current admin has the guts or actually the desire to do this although I have full faith in our SEALS to minimize loss of life of the hostages. They do have my permission to kill and throw overboard the pirates. Let them wash ashore as a learning moment…
Actually, the bigger question is why did the pirates target an American flagged vessel at this time? You would think that pirates would avoid American flagged vessels based on American sea power. I think this says something about the current admin, I am sorry to say…
Byron, the policy is that the US Government doesn’t pay ransom. I’m willing to bet Obama lets Maersk twist in the wind and negotiate the ransom via their insurers.
C’mon, Barry. Surprise me.
One notable example where we employed elements of Delta Force and SEAL Team Six was the Achille Lauro incident in ’85 where hijackers took control of an Italian cruise ship, killing one passenger. When an Egyptian jet tried to fly the hijackers to freedom, F-14 fighters intercepted and forced a landing where our counter terrorist unit was waiting. That , Ladies and Gentlemen, was when Ronald Reagan was president
I read this book a few years back. The author was on that op…and has some interesting inside baseball, first person stuff…on the tarmac at Sig…and the rest.
And was doing a jump, at night, from the back ramp of a commercial 727 over Lynnhaven Inlet a few days before he retired…oh, and did I mention the horrible malfunction?
great read.
The account I read came from “Rogue Warrior”, Dick Marcinko’s account when he led Seal Team Six. Another book you can’t put down.
Looks like I’ll need another book to add to the collection.
I am now hearing on FOX that the Americans took back control of the ship!
I hope we slaughtered each and evey pirate.
11:00 AM a call went out that the crew is safe and the pirates had been repelled!
This from FOX news.
According to the report, one highjacker was in custody aboard the ship, and the others were reported to be “in the water”…
I’m guessing that they probably didn’t bring their personal flotation devices with them.
Hah! The only better version would be one that has “with multiple gunshot wounds” following “pirates in the water”!
Of course, such actions undermine the President’s efforts to redefine our perceived national persona abroad…..yup, still a bunch of cowboys. Yee-Haw. I’ll bet the crew gets a strongly worded letter admonishing them of the risks associated with such brazen action without proper consent from higher authority! LOL.
I am reminded of Flight 93 “Let’s Roll”.
I hope a whole bunch of pain was inflicted before these scum were jettisoned.
Sounds like chum to me…
Hate to drop this in, but will with a reminder that initial reports are always wrong…
“The AP called the ship’s satellite phone. The man who answered it said the 20-member crew had been taken hostage but managed to seize one pirate and then successfully negotiate their own release.
“He says the crew has retaken control of the ship and the pirates are now in a lifeboat. But the man also says that they are holding the ship’s captain hostage in the vessel.”
Obama is somehow at fault, or maybe not-
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/world/africa/01pirates.html?_r=1&ref=world
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-you-are-being-lied-to-about-pirates-1225817.html
Object lessons work, and work well in tribal societies, as babs and others point out. The Israelis are particularly good at this — precise and devastating. I’m remembering during the Reagan administration, when Gaddafi had been particularly bellicose and increasingly annoying, Reagan sent over Libya either one plane or one flight of planes to bomb Gaddafi’s palace. The plane didn’t kill the tyrant [Gaddafi wasn't home in that particular palace that night] but it did scare the bejasus out of him — enough so that he spent the next many years moving from point to point and sleeping in a different bed each night. We didn’t hear any more empty threats from him for years on end. Seems to have broken his spirit, like.
So I’m not opposed to a targeted strike by our carrier pilots on the pirate boat, with bodies drifting ashore, as babs suggests.
Don’t mess with us. Or we’ll mess with you –big time.
Marianne, the blood-thirsty…
Hey Marianne – What I wouldn’t give to drink a pot of tea with you and chew it over in real time!
Any time, Babs, any time at all. I live for meetings like that. Just ask my surrogate children ….
Marianne
Cap and crew member being held hostage by the pie-rats that got away from the ship… Reporting from FOX.
What to do?
It seems to me that the SEALS would have an easier time taking them over, if they can find them, than a large cargo ship.
If everyone goes in the water, the SEALS could distinguish Americans from Somalis by their cry if nothing else.
Completely OT, but some of the aviation types might find this interesting. And the rest of you will find it terrifying:
http://www.planebuzz.com/2009/04/atlantic_southeast_airlines_li.html
XBrad?
Looks like that strike “solved” one problem immediately as it created one. Most EP check-lists, no matter what type aircraft, start off something like this: (1) O2-100% (2) Vents–full open, and so on..
Seems that step #2 was pretty much automatically taken care of immediately! LOL!!
It should read”check-lists for smoke and fire in the cockpit” sorry XBrad.
Really, I figured he’d just turn on the “No Smoking” sign and all would be good…
An in flight fire would have been a nasty event in the air with PAX.
As to the plane? A little bondo and buff it out. Good as new.
Lonesome, are you honestly trying to convince us that in the face of centuries of the common law of the sea, that these guys have a right to attack vessels on the high seas?
I only want money. Does that give me the right to hold you at gunpoint? And call me a little slow, but I’m not quite sure how attacking and seizing tankers and container ships helps prevent illegal fishing…
Why is it that when some asshole in the third world does something bad, there’s an idiot from the first world just waiting to tell me why it isn’t bad?
It is time for the knuckle-draggers to be given the coordinates to which the Captain has been taken. Ransom payment in the form of carpeting the surrounding area with iron-wrapped packages of HE should be made.
No knuckle draggers…send the SEALS…much more “cerebral” in their approach to the skilled application of whopa$$
Hey XBrad – Just let that guy roll.We all know this has nothing to do with fishing rights.
GO NAVY!
Perhaps someone on here would have the expertise necessary to answer this question. What if any armament can either a U.S. flagged merchant ship or it’s crew carry? From what I’ve heard so far the ship itself apparently is not supposed to mount .50′s fore and aft. Is that true? Are the crew permitted to carry small arms? Or do they have to sail completely defenseless?
Babs,
The Israeli raid at Entebbe got all their people back. It was a daring and brilliant move. It was not an El Al flight that was hijacked, rather Air France. Most of the pax were Jewish as the flight was headed to Tel Aviv. Interesting side note, the Izzies had one man KIA. He was the leader of the commandos and the brother of the current Prime Minister of Israel.
Lonesome, I have yet to hear of any of these pirates taking over a ship that is either a fishing vessel or one that is illegally dumping in their waters. I also have yet to hear of any of the money that they extort being used to ameliorate the issues that have been raised. Finally, I have yet to hear of anyone having raised these issues at all in any other forum.
I’ll posit that the things brought up in these two articles may well be happening. But I don’t see that these pirates are doing a damn thing about any of them. All I can see is a group of people taking advantage of anarchy to steal money at the point of a gun on the hight seas and then trying to whitewash it with misdirection.
RonF,
The problem with equipping merchant vessels is twofold. One, there’s a goodly deal of concern that either the crew will harm themselves (or moreso, their officers) and secondly, there are any number of restrictions on bringing the weapons into port. For instance, do we want Panamanian ships coming into US ports while bearing arms? The same feeling is found across the globe.
I don’t think we need to level half of Somolia to solve the problem, but so long as the ROE is so restrictive that NO ONE gets shot at, why would they feel any incentive to quit?
O.K. I wouldn’t be so comfortable with seeing a foreign ship in the Port of Chicago with anti-ship missles mounted on the deck. But I would have no problem at all with them having a full small-arms locker on board as long as the crew left them on board when they stepped ashore.
Thanks Bill, I knew my history was fuzzy. I think the lesson still serves… You WILL NOT attack a ship bound for Isreal either by land, air or sea…
I think the Israelis have made that perfectly clear.
babs, How many ships are bound to Israel by air or land?
/snark off
By air, plenty. By land you might ask the Somalis. I think I heard of an air strike by the Israelis not too long ago against shipments. Don’t know, maybe you could ask them…
It would be nice to see the Navy bring in a submerged sub and release some SEAL divers from the submerged position. From this point, we have a fork in the decision tree. The objective is to tip the Somali pirate and put everybody in the water. You can do this with either the sub or the divers. Either way, you have the element of surprise. You bring the freighter’s Captain and whatever crew members aboard the Sub. The question for the pirates, “How long can you tread water?” The answer, “Not long enough!”
As I understand it, a US Flagged Vessel in International Water is sovereign US Territory. Therefore, this attack on this particular vessel was nothing less than an attack on the United States of America.
Are there any inaccuracies in this post? If so, give me an accurate account so that I might learn.
Grumpy/
“…nothing less than an attack on the United States.”
So was the occupation of our Embassy in Tehran, but that didn’t seem to bother a certain previous Democrat President of the US all that much–at least not enough to bestir himself to meaningful action–so what makes you think a guy named Hussein is going to get all that upset by the actions of a bunch of Muslims?
Virgil/
As you look at the Laws of War, the concept of an “embargo”, whether if it is by land, by air or by sea, is an act of war. As in all things, the “devil is in the details.” As in many things, we should be looking at everything in context. If you will note in my post, there was anger, but controlled anger. Uncontrolled anger reveals more than needed.
Grumpy/
I didn’t bring up the subject of “embargo,” but, well, no, technically speaking the only status considered an overt act of war as is commonly accepted under Int. Law is “pacific blockade.” Which is why JFK chose to use the term “quarantine” in what was (in reality) a de facto “blockade” of Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crises.
As to controlled anger? Graham T. Allison quotes JFK in his seminal work “The Cuban Missile Crisis,” as exploding when informed of the extent of Soviet missile installations with: “He can’t do this to ME!” Seems like a very personalized, “un-diplomatic” reaction to me….
But to get back to your point. Yes, the actual act itself has the practical effect as an act of war indistinguishable from one to another of the various labels used to describe it–a rose by any other name, etc.,–but “legally” in terms of int. law, terminology makes ALL the difference.
Virgil,
You say something very important, about the terms “embargo” and “pacific blockade”. You wrote, “Yes, the actual act itself has the practical effect as an act of war…etc.” Just to prove I have a firm grasp of the obvious, a few comments. The term “pacific blockade” is *not* a geographical event, but an international maritime event. I would suggest a visit to a website-http://www.admiraltylawguide.com/supct/TheStyria.htm
There is some interesting insight in there. The interesting thing in there for me was the mention of the issue of sulphur for Nobel Explosives Co., now known as DuPont. Yes, this was Alfred Nobel, as in Nobel Prizes.
I hope they find a workable resolution to the issues.
HAVE A GREAT DAY!
So I’m still wondering whether it’s legal by American law and by any international agreements for a merchant vessel’s crew to have access to small arms.
US vessels can carry small arms. The problem lies in clearing into ports. Once cleared a civilian vessel is subject to the laws of that port. Entry into some countries such as Great Britain and Mexico can lead to prison time. Some port states do permit declared firearms to be sealed while in port but it varies. Carrying of fully automatic weapons or anything not a small arms is highly restricted by both import laws and requires an export license from the US government if has ever been in US control.
Oh…and forget about entering port in NY, NJ or California even if you’re US flagged as the weapons would violate those state’s laws.
So not all ports allow small arms even if they are locked up and no crew member is bearing them?
As far as NY, NJ and Cali go a) could a Federal law be crafted to supercede their laws, and b) I wonder if Miller vs. D.C. means that those laws wouldn’t pass a 2nd Amendment test.
Time to dust off “Operation Market time” and move it to the region.