This is a guest post:
There is always a bit of risk with off-the-cuff humor. Of course, we will try to refrain from asking for a picture of Skipper from Gilligan's Island the next time an issue with a Captain comes up (In Response to this ) and we'll certainly not hold it against the whole industry if you have some problems missing bridges (just lept into the way--did it?) or staying awake at the helm like one ship master recently in the Baltic. We'll keep it professional,all we ask is the same courtesy.
The first issue here is who is responsible. That is pretty simple. The flag state is responsible for administering law on board the vessel. The Master is responsible for seeing that the ship follows the law, companies are responsible for ensuring that their practices comply with the law and individuals are responsible for adhering to the law.
What has happened, however, is that the maritime industry has been allowed to cut some corners. Anybody heard of the Mongolian Coast Guard?--well, they apparently have a ship in the Red Sea. This is the issue of flags of convenience.
Countries have been able to set themselves out as flags of convenience. This means that a ship can be registered in that country with only a basic corporate presence tied to that nation--and it is often used because companies are attempting to save in terms of taxes and the efforts associated with regulatory burdens.
What is also noteworthy is that some of these countries which have amassed rather large fleets (as opposed to others which have solid maritime safety, security, pollution control and other programs which have smaller fleets) have rather small navies, coast guards or inspectorates. In fact, some of them have organizations that could be put to shame (in terms of numbers) by a first year criminology class.
So, for the first issue, a suggestion might be that the IMO put in place measures that require nations that are going to allow their flag to be used to demonstrate (credibly...not just a note) that they have the ability to administer law on board the vessel. If not, then they should list that flag as being incomplete in this regard and less trustworthy as opposed to other flags that do put the effort in.
The second issue involves who is responsible on board the vessel. This is something that is a bit of a surprise as most companies were working on the assumption that the Master is. Now, I can understand how he or she might be a bit concerned about the whole idea of suddenly being in charge of an incident...but this is the new reality in many parts of the world and it gets handled like everything else. First you see it. Then you get educated or trained about it Then you get some experience about it. Then it is all about learning as you go. It's not rocket science but there has to be somebody in charge of the situation on board the vessel and the last time I checked it was still the Master.
That being said, the Master is not defenseless. In many countries, where a company's directors and executives make decisions that cause employees to come into conflict with the law, they are also held responsible. So, if the shipping company responsible for the Master's decisions and ship operations puts the master in this position...there's one source. At the same time, private security companies need to be able to demonstrate that they have an adequate corporate structure in place to ensure appropriate and consistent quality and supervision. Otherwise, there are some issues there. That being said, the trails upward are pretty straight forward.
The third issue involves the use of the military.This has been one of the larger errors, in my own personal view. Military forces are trained to project power and neutralize the enemy. This is not about neutralizing pirates. At the same time, the protection of the vessel is not a law enforcement pattern issue in that law enforcement deals with imposing the will of the state to ensure compliance with law, maintenance of public order and the like. What this is about is protecting the ship's personnel, assets (including cargo) and operations in such a way that it can carry on with the best possible opportunity to arrive where it wants to go on time, in acceptable condition, and for reasonable cost.
IAMSP has, for over a year now, been vetting those companies that have come forward to it. That vetting process, based on Quality Assurance requirements, maritime circulars (including, but not limited to MSC 1405), and the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers. This structure has been established using the internationally recognized standards developed by ISO--meaning that it can have a properly global perspective as opposed to one standards association--and also involves the concept of continuous improvement--companies receive assistance in terms of continuously improving their performance over a couple of years in the program.
There has been a level of back-biting against private security in the media, even out of some assumedly respectable blogs, that warrants a response after this incident--involving serving naval personnel, not private security. From the IAMSP perspective, our member companies that have achieved provisional recognition can show that they meet standards on par with other professional communities (we used the legal, medical and engineering as the basis for ours). We have a number (over ten) more companies that are well underway in the vetting process.
These incidents are unfortunate, indeed tragic for at least two families involved. The professional approach to this is to work through finding out the facts and not turning it into a political quagmire. After the facts are figured out, then the next step is to do the right thing, correct the deficiencies and learn from it so that we don't see it again.
www.iamsponline.org
Showing posts with label Military forces for vessel escorts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Military forces for vessel escorts. Show all posts
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Somalia-Piracy-Under Reporting Incidents
An article was published recently by Bloomberg which can be found HERE ,and below the article we have posted some thoughts:
Private armed guards placed on merchant vessels to protect them against Somali pirates are under-reporting attacks, according to the European Union naval force patrol-ling in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean.
Security teams are concealing de-tails even though industry practice is to alert armed forces about any attacks or pirate sightings, Simon Church, EU Navfor's industry liaison officer, said Wednesday at a piracy forum in London.
"Security teams are shaping this on-board decision-making for reasons of liability, because of the action they may have taken to defend ships against attack," said Church, who works at a counter-piracy base in Northwood, England.
The number of armed guards stationed on ships travelling through the region jumped this year as pirate attacks soared to a record and countries including the U.K. changed laws to allow weapons on board. Somali pirates cost the shipping industry and governments as much as $6.9 billion last year, according to a One Earth Future Foundation report.
As many as half of all ships sailing through the region now use armed guards, the foundation said at the forum. That's up from 25 per cent earlier this year, and companies providing security earn $530.6 mil-lion annually, it estimated. A total of 42,450 vessels pass through the region annually, it says.
Church cited a "disconnect" between the number of attacks expected last year, based on military intelligence assessments of pirates' strength, and levels in 2009 and 2010. A "plausible argument" can be made that the increase in armed guards was the cause, he said.
Somali pirate attacks rose to 237 in 2011 from 219 in the previous year, according to figures from the London-based International Mari-time Bureau. No legal framework exists to establish how armed guards should interact with pirates and what happens if any attackers are killed or injured, Pottengal Mukundan, the bureau's director, said at the forum.
Military counter-piracy forces are reluctant to co-operate with private companies that provide armed guards, James Butler-Wright of Aegis Advisory said at the forum. The consultant helps companies assess and adjust exposure to risk.
"Private security is desperate to work with the military," said Butler-Wright, a senior maritime analyst at Aegis. "We get shut down pretty quickly" when seeking information from navies, he said."
Recent comments were made that private security firms have dropped off reporting out of concerns regarding the liability associated with their actions. I would propose that this statement is less than complete and certainly less than representative. Some other reasons (for discussion), why these reports have dropped off.
Number 1 - even though approaches and suspicious activities were reported to the centers, they were dismissed as being "fishermen", "groups of fishermen" or even "curious skiff operators." After a while, people that report in (similar to calling the police in a city) suspicious activity stop doing so because the reports are simply dismissed (just so and so acting out).
Number 2 - even though approaches or suspicious activities were reported to the centers, no information was returned back. In short, reporting into the centers was a one way street where private security companies were reporting in and getting little to nothing of value in return. I will personally vouch for at least one time where I reported in activity and, when I asked if there was anything else in the area, was told that the information was entered into the military system but could not be shared with private security companies (this was a witnessed report by the way).
Number 3 - even though reports went in, there were several instances where the reports were never acknowledged or posted where other companies could use them.
Number 4 - more than one instance is on the books where security went to report in and was informed that they (ship operator) did not want a report in because of insurance issues.
I would propose that the statements being made, while potentially having a grain of truth somewhere, is as much about projecting a point of view and deflecting the issue.
Private armed guards placed on merchant vessels to protect them against Somali pirates are under-reporting attacks, according to the European Union naval force patrol-ling in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean.
Security teams are concealing de-tails even though industry practice is to alert armed forces about any attacks or pirate sightings, Simon Church, EU Navfor's industry liaison officer, said Wednesday at a piracy forum in London.
"Security teams are shaping this on-board decision-making for reasons of liability, because of the action they may have taken to defend ships against attack," said Church, who works at a counter-piracy base in Northwood, England.
The number of armed guards stationed on ships travelling through the region jumped this year as pirate attacks soared to a record and countries including the U.K. changed laws to allow weapons on board. Somali pirates cost the shipping industry and governments as much as $6.9 billion last year, according to a One Earth Future Foundation report.
As many as half of all ships sailing through the region now use armed guards, the foundation said at the forum. That's up from 25 per cent earlier this year, and companies providing security earn $530.6 mil-lion annually, it estimated. A total of 42,450 vessels pass through the region annually, it says.
Church cited a "disconnect" between the number of attacks expected last year, based on military intelligence assessments of pirates' strength, and levels in 2009 and 2010. A "plausible argument" can be made that the increase in armed guards was the cause, he said.
Somali pirate attacks rose to 237 in 2011 from 219 in the previous year, according to figures from the London-based International Mari-time Bureau. No legal framework exists to establish how armed guards should interact with pirates and what happens if any attackers are killed or injured, Pottengal Mukundan, the bureau's director, said at the forum.
Military counter-piracy forces are reluctant to co-operate with private companies that provide armed guards, James Butler-Wright of Aegis Advisory said at the forum. The consultant helps companies assess and adjust exposure to risk.
"Private security is desperate to work with the military," said Butler-Wright, a senior maritime analyst at Aegis. "We get shut down pretty quickly" when seeking information from navies, he said."
Recent comments were made that private security firms have dropped off reporting out of concerns regarding the liability associated with their actions. I would propose that this statement is less than complete and certainly less than representative. Some other reasons (for discussion), why these reports have dropped off.
Number 1 - even though approaches and suspicious activities were reported to the centers, they were dismissed as being "fishermen", "groups of fishermen" or even "curious skiff operators." After a while, people that report in (similar to calling the police in a city) suspicious activity stop doing so because the reports are simply dismissed (just so and so acting out).
Number 2 - even though approaches or suspicious activities were reported to the centers, no information was returned back. In short, reporting into the centers was a one way street where private security companies were reporting in and getting little to nothing of value in return. I will personally vouch for at least one time where I reported in activity and, when I asked if there was anything else in the area, was told that the information was entered into the military system but could not be shared with private security companies (this was a witnessed report by the way).
Number 3 - even though reports went in, there were several instances where the reports were never acknowledged or posted where other companies could use them.
Number 4 - more than one instance is on the books where security went to report in and was informed that they (ship operator) did not want a report in because of insurance issues.
I would propose that the statements being made, while potentially having a grain of truth somewhere, is as much about projecting a point of view and deflecting the issue.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Piracy-MSB Group Ltd issues career openings
As we have been watching closely and promised to provide an update, the MSB Group Ltd seems to be moving along pretty quickly. Again, this is explained as a multi-state effort of logistical support and standardization of the movement of arms. Obviously this is a state controlled program and would be fantastic in the maritime security industry.
In having a look at their web site this morning, we now find a Careers page looking for some pretty interesting experience as below:
Logistical Support Staff:
"MSB Group is calling for curriculum vitae (cv) for the position of Logistical Support Staff. At this time, this is a general call for expressions of interest. Those with a background in the Navy or Coast Guard as small boat coxswain, armourer or in logistics / supply are welcome to submit their cv.
In addition to the experience listed above (minimum 2 years experience), individuals should be able to work to tight deadlines in reasonably austere conditions and interact tactfully and respectfully with other cultures and nationalities.
In addition to having a general understanding of the maritime environment and international arms regulations, the submitter must be fluent in both written and spoken English and have a strong (advanced) knowledge of Microsoft Word, Excel, Access, Outlook and PowerPoint.
If submitting your cv, please be clear with respect to the level skills associated with basic radio communications (maritime), small boat operations, the ability to operate computers, your knowledge of inventory control, weapon safety and handling, and basic inspection and audit techniques.
During the call for applications, those selected to submit applications are advised that there is a requirement for a state-coordinated background screening and reference checks. These will also include (but are not necessarily limited to) international background checks. Particular attention will be paid to the following attributes: reliability, trustworthiness, discretion, tact, and judgment.
We thank all those that will submit cv’s but wish to advise people that MSB Group is a logistical support group operating in a non-hostile environment. While we respectfully appreciate your former service, we are not seeking personnel who are looking to apply for on-board or on-shore security positions."
This seems to open up some land based opportunities for people with particular skills. Again, we will be keeping an eye on this for further developments.
In having a look at their web site this morning, we now find a Careers page looking for some pretty interesting experience as below:
Logistical Support Staff:
"MSB Group is calling for curriculum vitae (cv) for the position of Logistical Support Staff. At this time, this is a general call for expressions of interest. Those with a background in the Navy or Coast Guard as small boat coxswain, armourer or in logistics / supply are welcome to submit their cv.
In addition to the experience listed above (minimum 2 years experience), individuals should be able to work to tight deadlines in reasonably austere conditions and interact tactfully and respectfully with other cultures and nationalities.
In addition to having a general understanding of the maritime environment and international arms regulations, the submitter must be fluent in both written and spoken English and have a strong (advanced) knowledge of Microsoft Word, Excel, Access, Outlook and PowerPoint.
If submitting your cv, please be clear with respect to the level skills associated with basic radio communications (maritime), small boat operations, the ability to operate computers, your knowledge of inventory control, weapon safety and handling, and basic inspection and audit techniques.
During the call for applications, those selected to submit applications are advised that there is a requirement for a state-coordinated background screening and reference checks. These will also include (but are not necessarily limited to) international background checks. Particular attention will be paid to the following attributes: reliability, trustworthiness, discretion, tact, and judgment.
We thank all those that will submit cv’s but wish to advise people that MSB Group is a logistical support group operating in a non-hostile environment. While we respectfully appreciate your former service, we are not seeking personnel who are looking to apply for on-board or on-shore security positions."
This seems to open up some land based opportunities for people with particular skills. Again, we will be keeping an eye on this for further developments.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Somali Piracy-Coastal States-Weaponry Program
We have been keeping a close eye on the new MSB Group since I found it posted on the net. I said I would bring more information as it comes and now we have found a new page on the site http://msbgroupltd.com/registration/ which is the Registration page.
This page now has a download link to access the information of how this process will work. The member coastal states however, are not yet listed as the site says they are awaiting the formal announcements of these coastal states.
What is the most interesting, is that any Private Maritime Security Company that applies to the system, is vetted by the State itself, and any employee of these companies is also vetted by the state. This will add a lot of consistency to the industry and some serious oversight.
Now we will wait for the formal statements from these Coastal States and provide any update we may find.
This page now has a download link to access the information of how this process will work. The member coastal states however, are not yet listed as the site says they are awaiting the formal announcements of these coastal states.
What is the most interesting, is that any Private Maritime Security Company that applies to the system, is vetted by the State itself, and any employee of these companies is also vetted by the state. This will add a lot of consistency to the industry and some serious oversight.
Now we will wait for the formal statements from these Coastal States and provide any update we may find.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Somalia - Piracy - IAMSP and a new Group
Found this today and is very interesting. I am hoping to find out some more, as posted on their site at http://msbgroupltd.com/about/
MSB Group Ltd announces that it has completed its pilot and research phase of a project that will afford shipping companies with a clear and authoritative means of selecting private armed maritime security companies that have committed to the highest of legal and ethical practices.
Under the third-party oversight of IAMSP, MSB has formed the framework of a public-private partnership that will address three major needs. First, shipping companies will be able to verify that the security company that they are considering have met certain vetting criteria. This vetting criteria is based on a range of authoritative requirements, including those of the Coastal States, reducing the risk of disruptions while adherence to unique requirements are met.
Finally, it affords the private security company with a clear and concise point with which to communicate and coordinate its activities and logistics. Working within this framework will demonstrate to all those involved and external to the process, that each of the major parties in this activity are working together to counter the proliferation of grey and black market arms, reduce the potential for disruptions in supply chains and operate in a way that is respectful of the needs of the overall maritime shipping community.
Check back soon for the regional launching of this program for the logistical support for firearms used in merchant vessel security.
A bit more information here: http://t.co/baDFwkZq from the IAMSP Web Site
We will post more as it comes available
MSB Group Ltd announces that it has completed its pilot and research phase of a project that will afford shipping companies with a clear and authoritative means of selecting private armed maritime security companies that have committed to the highest of legal and ethical practices.
Under the third-party oversight of IAMSP, MSB has formed the framework of a public-private partnership that will address three major needs. First, shipping companies will be able to verify that the security company that they are considering have met certain vetting criteria. This vetting criteria is based on a range of authoritative requirements, including those of the Coastal States, reducing the risk of disruptions while adherence to unique requirements are met.
Finally, it affords the private security company with a clear and concise point with which to communicate and coordinate its activities and logistics. Working within this framework will demonstrate to all those involved and external to the process, that each of the major parties in this activity are working together to counter the proliferation of grey and black market arms, reduce the potential for disruptions in supply chains and operate in a way that is respectful of the needs of the overall maritime shipping community.
Check back soon for the regional launching of this program for the logistical support for firearms used in merchant vessel security.
A bit more information here: http://t.co/baDFwkZq from the IAMSP Web Site
We will post more as it comes available
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Somalia - Piracy - New Year - Growth
Today is Christmas and we are wishing all a happy holiday time. 2011 has been a wonderful year for ISSG as we now have 8 active offices on 4 continents. Hopefully by the new year we will have our 9th office on our 5th continent. This has been the year of growth and we are not slowing down.
ISSG Group of Companies is blessed to have the best full time staff of personnel in the industry today from countries such as: USA, Lebanon, France, India, United Kingdom, Comoros, Philippines, Nepal, South Africa and Belgium.
ISSG is a truly multi cultural diverse company and all our men are employed due to expertise and experience, regardless of nationality. We take pride in our employees and our management structure to provide the best solutions for maritime security, Close protection, facility security and supply chain solutions.
We wish all a Merry Christmas, and hope that your new year is as prosperous as ours looks to be.
ISSG Group of Companies is blessed to have the best full time staff of personnel in the industry today from countries such as: USA, Lebanon, France, India, United Kingdom, Comoros, Philippines, Nepal, South Africa and Belgium.
ISSG is a truly multi cultural diverse company and all our men are employed due to expertise and experience, regardless of nationality. We take pride in our employees and our management structure to provide the best solutions for maritime security, Close protection, facility security and supply chain solutions.
We wish all a Merry Christmas, and hope that your new year is as prosperous as ours looks to be.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Somalia Piracy - Fox Business News
ISSG Holdings, Ltd. has been selected to appear
on
21st Century Business Television series
Boca Raton, FL (TBD) --- Multi-Media Productions (USA), Inc. is pleased to announce that ISSG Holdings, Ltd. will be featured on 21st Century Business.
ISSG Holdings, Ltd., is an international business company engaged in
merchant vessel protection. We have a solution based mindset providing a
ISSG Holdings, Ltd., are supply chain security specialists with a strong maritime security capacity demonstrated through 4 years of protecting vessels passing through high risk waters. With attacks on vessels in areas such as the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean reaching their highest levels in the last five years and with economies continuing to teeter back and forth between slow growth and recession, it has become more important for shipping companies to be able to assure that they get the cargo to its intended destination, on time, in acceptable condition and at reasonable cost.
merchant vessel protection. We have a solution based mindset providing a
ISSG Holdings, Ltd., are supply chain security specialists with a strong maritime security capacity demonstrated through 4 years of protecting vessels passing through high risk waters. With attacks on vessels in areas such as the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean reaching their highest levels in the last five years and with economies continuing to teeter back and forth between slow growth and recession, it has become more important for shipping companies to be able to assure that they get the cargo to its intended destination, on time, in acceptable condition and at reasonable cost.
.
According to Michael Murrell, CEO of ISSG Holdings, the maritime security industry is at a crossroads. It is not enough for security companies to protect the vessel. They must ensure that they have a broad understanding of the risks involved, take steps to address those risks, and continuously monitor their activities to ensure that their actions do not lead to new risks to the vessel. At the same time, security companies must understand the overall movement of goods—contributing to the effective, and efficient, trade between economies.
ISSG Holdings has built a highly capable network and maintains a leadership role within the maritime security community. ISSG Holdings will, based on an expert assessment of risk and in accordance with the appropriate laws, provide armed security services. These services are delivered using some of the highest trained and most capable maritime security operators—the Marine Commandos (MarCos), a unit that has proven itself in those very waters for years. Through its affiliates, such as ISSG India and ISSG Comoros, the company has been able to attract and maintain a capable team ready to serve the shipping industry
ISSG Holdings has also taken a leadership role in the maritime security industry’s push towards professionalization—a significant effort intended to build a true community of professionals that will ensure that the shipping company’s brand and legal status is also well protected. A significant contributor and vetted corporate member of the International Association of Maritime Security Professionals, it was also one of the first maritime security companies to sign onto the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers. These efforts also include some of its key members participating in senior leadership positions in professional security, first responder, and academic communities.
The combination of these efforts has made ISSG a uniquely capable and credible maritime security service provider today.
J.L Haber VP of Programming at Multi Media Productions, added, “In our search for companies with maritime security solutions, ISSG Holdings, Ltd. stood out as a unique company. We are excited to have them as a guest on our program.”
About 21st Century Business
21st Century Business airs on CNBC (as paid programming) and the Fox Business Network (as paid programming). 21st Century Business may also be viewed through video on demand via www.21cbtv.com. The 21CBTV Series is also available at more than 90 prestigious college universities, including Carnegie Mellon University, Howard University, Dartmouth College and Georgetown University.
For specific market-by-market air dates and times, please e-mail Moniqueh@mmpusa.com. For more information, please visit www.21cbtv.com.
Friday, September 16, 2011
Mozambique holds 'pirate hunters'
As Reported HERE
The men reportedly say they work for the US security firm GreySide. The US embassy says the group has no connection to the US government.
GreySide has not commented.
Nampula provincial police spokesperson Inacio Dina told the BBC that the weapons include an FN 5.5mm rifle, as well as ammunition and communications equipment.
The police have named the leader of the group as 42-year-old US citizen Michael Ferguson. He has not commented to the press.
The group had reportedly flown from the United States via Ethiopia and Kenya, where they picked up the weapons.
Mr Ferguson reportedly said their plan was to catch small boats in the northern Mozambican coastal city of Pemba before joining a larger vessel and trying to free the boat from pirates - it is not clear which ship they were allegedly trying to rescue.
They expected further weapons to reach them in Pemba, which they had not been able to load on the plane, police say.
Somalia-based pirates have attacked ships across the Indian Ocean, earning millions of dollars from ransom payments.
Four Britons, who say they were trying to provide protection from pirates, were released by Eritrea in June after six months in captivity.
Mozambique holds 'pirate hunters'
Four Americans and one Briton, who say they were trying to free a boat seized by pirates, have been arrested in Mozambique and accused of possessing illegal weapons.
They were detained at the airport in the country's third city, Nampula, police say.The men reportedly say they work for the US security firm GreySide. The US embassy says the group has no connection to the US government.
GreySide has not commented.
Nampula provincial police spokesperson Inacio Dina told the BBC that the weapons include an FN 5.5mm rifle, as well as ammunition and communications equipment.
The police have named the leader of the group as 42-year-old US citizen Michael Ferguson. He has not commented to the press.
The group had reportedly flown from the United States via Ethiopia and Kenya, where they picked up the weapons.
Mr Ferguson reportedly said their plan was to catch small boats in the northern Mozambican coastal city of Pemba before joining a larger vessel and trying to free the boat from pirates - it is not clear which ship they were allegedly trying to rescue.
They expected further weapons to reach them in Pemba, which they had not been able to load on the plane, police say.
Somalia-based pirates have attacked ships across the Indian Ocean, earning millions of dollars from ransom payments.
Four Britons, who say they were trying to provide protection from pirates, were released by Eritrea in June after six months in captivity.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Oman Navy Foils Pirate Attack
AS Reported HERE
4 September 2011 MUSCAT — Oman’s navy has thwarted an attempt by Somali brigands to hijack a Liberian-flagged vessel off the Salalah coast. Ten pirates were arrested.
Oman navy foils pirates’ attempt to hijack vessel
4 September 2011
The incident happened on Thursday night some 34 nautical miles south west of the Salalah Port and outside Omani territorial waters, a spokesman for the Royal Navy of Oman (RNO) said.
A RNO vessel rushed to the site after being informed about the hijack attempt on merchant ship ‘Nedlloyd Africa’ and, helped by aircraft from the Royal Air Force of Oman (Rafo), rescued the ship. During the operation, a dhow hijacked earlier by pirates was also freed. No one was hurt, the RNO spokesman said, adding that all the 10 pirates, who threw their weapons in the sea, were arrested. The 11 crew members of the dhow, all Asians, were released.
The arrested pirates were handed over to the Royal Oman Police (ROP) for procedures before their trial.
Sunday, July 10, 2011
BRITISH NAVY FIRED ON OFF SOMALIA
As Reported HERE
BRITISH NAVY IN DANGEROUS ACTION OFF NORTHERN COAST OF SOMALIA
AFRICA 11 July 2011. British Royal Navy warship entangled in domestic affairs skirmish.
A British warship allegedly having the commander of the Somaliland navy and some of his soldiers on board attracted on Saturday serious military fire when it came close to the shore off Laasqoray, the coastal town of Warsangeliland at the Somali shores of the Gulf of Aden. From the foreign warship reportedly one amphibious vessel and two commando boats were launched with the intent to land on the beach.
Local officials, observers and media reported the incident as an unprecedented provocation and attack on the sovereignty of Somalia and specifically of the Warsangeli territory.
Reports indicated earlier last week that a British warship had come to Somaliland’s port city of Berbera where President Ahmed Silanyo reportedly met British officials on board the vessel.
The ship is believed to be a patrol ship that is part of the western-led anti-piracy initiatives along the coasts of Somalia.
While neither EU NAVFOR nor the British navy reported the incident, security forces of Somalia’s breakaway region of Puntland confirmed that they had fired towards a British warship near the coast.
The political background is the long-standing fight between the former British colony of Somaliland in the Northwest of Somalia, which today prefers to be an independent, though internationally not recognized breakaway republic and Puntland, the federal regional state of Somalia, located to the north-east.
Between these two blocks, the land of the Warsangeli and further south the Dulbahante homeland form a buffer zone, which regularly sees skirmishes over the control for these areas, which also contain oil- and other mineral concessions, being fought over between the two blocks.
Somaliland and Puntland are engaged in this long-standing border dispute particularly along the borders of the Sool, Sanaag and Ceyn regions located in the central north of Somalia since 1992.
The latest incident now involved a British naval vessel on a mission with an obviously pro-Somaliland agenda which was countered by forces loyal to the Puntland government as well as by those of the local Warsangeli governance.
The provincial commissioner of Sanaag region, Mohamud Dabayl said the war ship sailed towards Laasqoray, a strategic port town in the North of Somalia which is part of a territory disputed by the Puntland and Somaliland authorities.
"The ship appeared to have been misdirected and its captain may have been told that Laasqoray would be part of Somaliland. It was sailing towards Laasqoray” Dabayl told the local media in Bosaso.
He said Puntland authorities fired warning shots after it emerged that the warship entered their territory without prior notification, an issue regional officials said is a violation of territorial sovereignty and international law.
“Our security forces fired warning shots towards the ship because it was sailing through the coast of Puntland. The warning was to tell the crew that they were not in the territorial waters of Somaliland” he added.
According to the local Hiraan media, the regional commissioner said Puntland security personnel had arrested one person from the ship who was waving the flag of the self declared republic of Somaliland at the time when the warning shots were fired.
Local observers reported that though heavier weapons including RPGs and also small arms fire were directed against the British naval contingent and three of the Somaliland soldiers, who had landed from the British ship on the beach, were arrested, nobody got hurt.
BRITISH NAVY IN DANGEROUS ACTION OFF NORTHERN COAST OF SOMALIA
AFRICA 11 July 2011. British Royal Navy warship entangled in domestic affairs skirmish.
A British warship allegedly having the commander of the Somaliland navy and some of his soldiers on board attracted on Saturday serious military fire when it came close to the shore off Laasqoray, the coastal town of Warsangeliland at the Somali shores of the Gulf of Aden. From the foreign warship reportedly one amphibious vessel and two commando boats were launched with the intent to land on the beach.
Local officials, observers and media reported the incident as an unprecedented provocation and attack on the sovereignty of Somalia and specifically of the Warsangeli territory.
Reports indicated earlier last week that a British warship had come to Somaliland’s port city of Berbera where President Ahmed Silanyo reportedly met British officials on board the vessel.
The ship is believed to be a patrol ship that is part of the western-led anti-piracy initiatives along the coasts of Somalia.
While neither EU NAVFOR nor the British navy reported the incident, security forces of Somalia’s breakaway region of Puntland confirmed that they had fired towards a British warship near the coast.
The political background is the long-standing fight between the former British colony of Somaliland in the Northwest of Somalia, which today prefers to be an independent, though internationally not recognized breakaway republic and Puntland, the federal regional state of Somalia, located to the north-east.
Between these two blocks, the land of the Warsangeli and further south the Dulbahante homeland form a buffer zone, which regularly sees skirmishes over the control for these areas, which also contain oil- and other mineral concessions, being fought over between the two blocks.
Somaliland and Puntland are engaged in this long-standing border dispute particularly along the borders of the Sool, Sanaag and Ceyn regions located in the central north of Somalia since 1992.
The latest incident now involved a British naval vessel on a mission with an obviously pro-Somaliland agenda which was countered by forces loyal to the Puntland government as well as by those of the local Warsangeli governance.
The provincial commissioner of Sanaag region, Mohamud Dabayl said the war ship sailed towards Laasqoray, a strategic port town in the North of Somalia which is part of a territory disputed by the Puntland and Somaliland authorities.
"The ship appeared to have been misdirected and its captain may have been told that Laasqoray would be part of Somaliland. It was sailing towards Laasqoray” Dabayl told the local media in Bosaso.
He said Puntland authorities fired warning shots after it emerged that the warship entered their territory without prior notification, an issue regional officials said is a violation of territorial sovereignty and international law.
“Our security forces fired warning shots towards the ship because it was sailing through the coast of Puntland. The warning was to tell the crew that they were not in the territorial waters of Somaliland” he added.
According to the local Hiraan media, the regional commissioner said Puntland security personnel had arrested one person from the ship who was waving the flag of the self declared republic of Somaliland at the time when the warning shots were fired.
Local observers reported that though heavier weapons including RPGs and also small arms fire were directed against the British naval contingent and three of the Somaliland soldiers, who had landed from the British ship on the beach, were arrested, nobody got hurt.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
India to charge Somali pirates and their hostages
Of Compassion—and Common Sense
Recent media reports HERE that India is intended to charge 14 suspected Somali pirates and their three hostages that drifted to within kilometres of India’s coast. While one can certainly see the pirates facing charges, the argument that the Somali’s will only be charged with trespassing is somewhat mind boggling. To charge the three Yemeni, indicated as being “hostages”, for entering into India’s territory without the appropriate travel documents should also raise a few eyebrows.
India has taken a reasonably tough stance on its border controls since the Mumbai attacks. The fact that this vessel was reported to have been found near the same route suspected to have been used for those attacks probably does not help the situation. It may even be necessary to show a strong hand against both the Somalis and Yemeni on board so that there is no appearance of vulnerabilities in the overall system.
The problem here is that there are indications that India’s stance on its border controls may be moving beyond the pale of decency and common sense. There have been reports, corroborated through third sources, that Indian officials were directly involved in failing to allow at least one person from being able to seek medical attention when that individual was left stranded on board a vessel (the company having gone into receivership and leaving a number of its crew and personnel stranded).
Combined with those, and other, past reports, there are adequate indications that India`s policies in this respect have moved outside of what might be called reasonable conduct. While, of course, the state certainly has its right to manage its own sovereign affairs as it sees fit, it may be prudent for some to be reminded that (1) they operate within a community of nations and (2) that strength and compassion are a far more powerful mix than simply exercising strength without judgement.
Let us hope that common sense prevails...that the pirates are held pending more serious charges and that the Yemeni persons held hostage are recognized for being under duress and hardly able to be held criminally responsible for their apparent transgression.
Full Article:
AHMEDABAD, India (AFP) – Indian police said Wednesday they would charge 14 suspected Somali pirates and their three hostages who drifted to within kilometres (miles) of the country's west coast in a fishing boat.
A senior police official said that investigators believed three Yemeni men found on the trawler were hostages of the alleged pirates, who are believed to have hijacked the vessel two weeks ago off the coast of Somalia.
The Yemenis told police the boat had been adrift in the Indian Ocean after running out of fuel and had been carried to the Indian coast by the tide.
All 17 men were detained in the coastal district of Junagarh in Gujarat state, some 300 kilometres (186 miles) southwest from the main regional city of Ahmedabad.
"After interrogation we have ascertained that the Somali nationals are pirates who had kidnapped the three Yemenis," Junagarh police chief Depankar Trivedi told AFP by telephone.
He said police would press charges against the Somalis and their captives for entering India without valid travel documents.
The official said the Somalis were only charged with trespassing because the hijacking occurred beyond India's jurisdiction in international waters.
"We are charging them only for the violation of Indian laws," he said, adding the three Yemenis did not possess travel documents and so were also in breach of India's Passport Act.
Trivedi said a marine police team detained the men on Sunday after local fishermen reported the presence of the Yemen-flagged vessel only a couple of kilometres (miles) off the coast of Gujarat.
India's coastguard and navy are on high alert against pirates seeking to evade the international force patrolling waters off Somalia by attacking shipping much further east in the Indian Ocean.
More than 100 pirates have been caught and are awaiting trial in India following a series of violent skirmishes near the country's Lakshadweep islands since the start of this year.
India, which does not have a specific anti-piracy-law, is planning to frame legislation to deal with the scourge.
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Captain Killed in Cross Fire
As Reported HERE
Captain of hijacked Taiwan boat died in crossfire
Published: Saturday, May. 28, 2011 - 8:05 pm
TAIPEI, Taiwan -- Taiwan's Foreign Ministry says the captain of a hijacked Taiwanese fishing boat was killed in crossfire between U.S. Navy personnel and Somali pirates.
The ministry says the USS Stephen W. Groves and pirates aboard the hijacked Jih Chun Tsai 68 fishing trawler exchanged fire over the Indian Ocean during the U.S. frigate's anti-piracy patrol mission earlier this month.
The ministry said in a statement late Saturday that three pirates and Taiwanese captain Wu Lai-yu were killed in the incident.
The ministry said pirates hijacked the boat off the Somali coast in March 2010 and used the vessel to launch maritime attacks.
Confrontations with Somali pirates have turned increasingly violent in recent months.
The ministry says the USS Stephen W. Groves and pirates aboard the hijacked Jih Chun Tsai 68 fishing trawler exchanged fire over the Indian Ocean during the U.S. frigate's anti-piracy patrol mission earlier this month.
The ministry said in a statement late Saturday that three pirates and Taiwanese captain Wu Lai-yu were killed in the incident.
The ministry said pirates hijacked the boat off the Somali coast in March 2010 and used the vessel to launch maritime attacks.
Confrontations with Somali pirates have turned increasingly violent in recent months.
Monday, May 23, 2011
US Navy Predicting Pirate Attacks
After reading this article HERE I had to have a chuckle as this is another example of the US spending probably millions on this prediction model and software, when we have been doing the exact same thing for over two years now. We actually publish this on a monthly basis, in addition to our daily reports supplied to our teams on the water.
Naval researchers update the anti-pirate program every 12 hours with new data about winds, wave heights and
The U.S. Navy Thinks They Can Predict Where Pirate Attacks Will Happen Next
Let us not forget pirates still exist. In fact, SEAL Team Six exterminated a pack of Somali pirates a couple years back. And because they're still a threat, the Navy developed advanced software that flags high risk pirate attack zones. According to Discovery, the app takes weather, known pirate locations, vulnerable shipping routes and past history into consideration. Thousands of simulations are run, which determines the most probable areas of attack. When the factors all align, the alarms go off.Naval researchers update the anti-pirate program every 12 hours with new data about winds, wave heights and
undersea currents — all factors that affect the pirates' ability to operate small skiffs to attack commercial ships. The model, known as the Piracy Attack Risk Surface (PARS), also uses classified reports about pirate whereabouts from captured sailors or unmanned drone aircraft patrolling the skies.In addition, the Navy is developing a high-speed, remote control boat called the Predator, which can run down pirates with a swiftness. Excellent.
The result is a color-coded map that divides the ocean into zones of probability of pirate strikes, much like NOAA's hurricane forecast.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
US Navy Fires on Pirates
As Reported HERE
The interdiction took place at 10:35 a.m. local time. The Norfolk, Va.-based Bulkeley, assigned to Joint Task Force 150, had received a mayday call from the German-owned, Panamanian-flagged crude carrier Artemis Glory, which said it was being chased and attacked by pirates.
Bulkeley responded to the mayday call, first heard by a Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship and relayed to Combined Maritime Forces, by launching an SH-60B Seahawk helicopter assigned to Helicopter Squadron Light 48, Detachment 4, to investigate. When it arrived on station — a command spokesman could not provide the distance or transit time — the crew saw four individuals in a skiff firing at Artemis Glory, using small arms.
The helicopter crew opened fire on the skiff under what command spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Sam Hearn of the Royal Navy said was the principle of “extended unit self-defense” on behalf of the crude carrier. All four pirates are believed to have been killed, Hearn said. Hearn said he did not know which weapon system was employed but noted that the SH-60B is equipped with a single M-240 machine gun.
Officials do not believe the helicopter was fired upon by the pirates, Hearn said.
Hearn said Bulkeley did not pick up the bodies, and could not say whether the skiff was sunk. Once it was determined that Artemis Glory was out of danger, the ship continued on its way, Hearn said. The ship is transporting a cargo of crude oil from Saudi Arabia to China.
None of Artemis Glory’s 23 crew members were injured, according to the command.
It’s at least the second run-in with piracy in the region for Bulkeley. On March 5, the simple arrival of Bulkeley in response to a hijacking attempt on a Japanese oiler — a Turkish frigate subsequently joined the U.S. ship — convinced four pirates already on board to surrender to a boarding team without a shot being fired.
Navy: Helo fires on pirate skiff, killing 4
The crew of a Navy helicopter launched from the destroyer Bulkeley fired upon and is believed to have killed four pirates who were in the process of attacking a crude oil carrier while it was transiting the Gulf of Oman on Monday, according to Combined Maritime Forces.
The interdiction took place at 10:35 a.m. local time. The Norfolk, Va.-based Bulkeley, assigned to Joint Task Force 150, had received a mayday call from the German-owned, Panamanian-flagged crude carrier Artemis Glory, which said it was being chased and attacked by pirates.
Bulkeley responded to the mayday call, first heard by a Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship and relayed to Combined Maritime Forces, by launching an SH-60B Seahawk helicopter assigned to Helicopter Squadron Light 48, Detachment 4, to investigate. When it arrived on station — a command spokesman could not provide the distance or transit time — the crew saw four individuals in a skiff firing at Artemis Glory, using small arms.
The helicopter crew opened fire on the skiff under what command spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Sam Hearn of the Royal Navy said was the principle of “extended unit self-defense” on behalf of the crude carrier. All four pirates are believed to have been killed, Hearn said. Hearn said he did not know which weapon system was employed but noted that the SH-60B is equipped with a single M-240 machine gun.
Officials do not believe the helicopter was fired upon by the pirates, Hearn said.
Hearn said Bulkeley did not pick up the bodies, and could not say whether the skiff was sunk. Once it was determined that Artemis Glory was out of danger, the ship continued on its way, Hearn said. The ship is transporting a cargo of crude oil from Saudi Arabia to China.
None of Artemis Glory’s 23 crew members were injured, according to the command.
It’s at least the second run-in with piracy in the region for Bulkeley. On March 5, the simple arrival of Bulkeley in response to a hijacking attempt on a Japanese oiler — a Turkish frigate subsequently joined the U.S. ship — convinced four pirates already on board to surrender to a boarding team without a shot being fired.
IMO Endorses Armed Maritime Security
HERE As Reported
About one in 10 ships off the Somali coast already carry armed guards.
But observers say this number is likely to rise now that the UN has endorsed the practice.
The IMO says there were 489 reports of piracy and armed robbery against ships in 2010 - up more then 20% on 2009.
The areas worst affected were the Indian Ocean, East Africa and the Far East including the South China Sea, South America and the Caribbean.
So far this year more than 200 cases have been reported.
Correspondents say piracy in the Indian Ocean is getting more lucrative and more violent, despite an anti-piracy EU naval force patrolling the area.
Torture The IMO's new recommendations are backed by the independent trade body for security companies operating at sea, the Security Association for the Maritime Industry (Sami), launched last year.
Peter Cook, co-founder of Sami, told the BBC: "The pirates have been killing - they have been torturing and doing fake executions and the level of violence is increasing.
"It is clear that something has got to be done in order for free trade to be able to continue and it is for that reason that the IMO have decided to go down this very unusual route."
The IMO insists that the guidelines are not intended to institutionalise the use of armed, privately contracted security staff on ships and that they do not address all the legal issues that could be linked to their use.
The IMO describes the guidance as "interim recommendations" and says it will review them in September.
IMO endorses use of armed guards on ships
The UN's International Maritime Organization (IMO) has endorsed the use of private armed guards to protect ships from piracy.
After a meeting in London, the IMO issued guidelines for the use of guards on board ships in areas of high risk, including in the Indian Ocean. About one in 10 ships off the Somali coast already carry armed guards.
But observers say this number is likely to rise now that the UN has endorsed the practice.
The IMO says there were 489 reports of piracy and armed robbery against ships in 2010 - up more then 20% on 2009.
The areas worst affected were the Indian Ocean, East Africa and the Far East including the South China Sea, South America and the Caribbean.
So far this year more than 200 cases have been reported.
Correspondents say piracy in the Indian Ocean is getting more lucrative and more violent, despite an anti-piracy EU naval force patrolling the area.
Torture The IMO's new recommendations are backed by the independent trade body for security companies operating at sea, the Security Association for the Maritime Industry (Sami), launched last year.
Peter Cook, co-founder of Sami, told the BBC: "The pirates have been killing - they have been torturing and doing fake executions and the level of violence is increasing.
"It is clear that something has got to be done in order for free trade to be able to continue and it is for that reason that the IMO have decided to go down this very unusual route."
The IMO insists that the guidelines are not intended to institutionalise the use of armed, privately contracted security staff on ships and that they do not address all the legal issues that could be linked to their use.
The IMO describes the guidance as "interim recommendations" and says it will review them in September.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Where are the UKMTO reports?
A quick email report from one of our security teams:
"An incident occurred this evening at 1730 hrs local time 20 miles from pointA. A dhow was picked up on radar at eight miles and we altered course to avoid,the dhow altered to intercept I informed ukmto and we managed to avoid,30 minutes later a second dhow was picked up coming from the same general direction as the first(southerly)we altered course and again the dhow altered to intercept. At this stage I called a nearby combined forces warship and informed him of the situation,about ten minutes later another target appeared directly on our new courseat 8 miles,we altered course again to pass between and both altered course to intercept,I reappraised the military asset of the situation, whilst doing so the second target ,now at six miles launched two skiffs at us it was just getting dark and we could not yet see the skiffs,I was just about to put the crew into standby position when a navy helicopter came up on channel 16. I informed him of our situation and he told me he was ten minutes from our location.within two minutes the two skiffs and the two dhows turned away and switched on their nav lights and headed out of the irtc. The helicopter investigated but could not see any weapons we spoke again and he said he would remain with me for the next hour to ensure they did not follow and to clear the way ahead.when he left I gave him our appreciation."
There has been no reporting by the UKMTO for about a week now, and with active teams on the water, we know for a fact that piracy incidents are still going on daily.
Sunday, April 17, 2011
Indian Navy Warship Parked off of Somaila
As reported HERE
New Delhi, April 17
As Somalian pirates continue to hold seven Indian merchant sailors hostage, the Indian Navy, in what is a possible retaliatory posture, today diverted a warship from anti-piracy patrolling duties to station it off the coast of Somalia in North-eastern Africa.
On Friday pirates released eight of the 15 Indian sailors held hostage since September last year. Seven other Indians, which includes six officers, have been held back despite the pirates having got an undisclosed sum as ransom from the owners of the merchant ship MV Asphalt Venture. The ship was hijacked in September last year when it was on its way to Durban from Mombassa, Kenya.
The pirates have been quoted in the international media as wanting to trade the seven Indian sailors in a “swap deal” with Indian authorities to seek the release of more than 100 of their brethren captured by the Indian Navy. Sources confirmed that representatives of the external affairs, home affairs, defence and shipping ministries, respectively, met today to take stock of the situation.
The Navy was tasked to send its warship. A Talwar class frigate a 4000-tonne vessel has been diverted from the its anti-piracy duties off the gulf of Aden to be stationed off the coast of Somalia, sources said while refusing to give further details on the operations the ship will carry out. Additional ships will take some five days to reach, hence the Indian Navy can seek the aid of other Navies in the areas. A flotilla of European and US-led Navies is on patrol close by and the international Navies usually cooperate with each other at high seas.
Authorities are tight-lipped about the possible options that the government will exercise to free the remaining seven hostages. A “swap deal” is not one of the options on the table. The last time India was involved in the hostage “swap deal” was in Kandahar 1999 when three terrorists were released to free 150 passengers of the Indian Airlines flight IC-814 taken hostage by pro-Taliban militants.
Meanwhile, this morning the MV Asphalt Venture owners appealed to Somali pirates to keep their word and release the vessels remaining seven Indian sailors. The owners have expressed deep disappointment over the pirates reneging on their word. This is despite meeting all demands of the negotiated settlement and paying the mutually agreed ransom, an official statement issued by the company said.
New Delhi, April 17
As Somalian pirates continue to hold seven Indian merchant sailors hostage, the Indian Navy, in what is a possible retaliatory posture, today diverted a warship from anti-piracy patrolling duties to station it off the coast of Somalia in North-eastern Africa.
On Friday pirates released eight of the 15 Indian sailors held hostage since September last year. Seven other Indians, which includes six officers, have been held back despite the pirates having got an undisclosed sum as ransom from the owners of the merchant ship MV Asphalt Venture. The ship was hijacked in September last year when it was on its way to Durban from Mombassa, Kenya.
The pirates have been quoted in the international media as wanting to trade the seven Indian sailors in a “swap deal” with Indian authorities to seek the release of more than 100 of their brethren captured by the Indian Navy. Sources confirmed that representatives of the external affairs, home affairs, defence and shipping ministries, respectively, met today to take stock of the situation.
The Navy was tasked to send its warship. A Talwar class frigate a 4000-tonne vessel has been diverted from the its anti-piracy duties off the gulf of Aden to be stationed off the coast of Somalia, sources said while refusing to give further details on the operations the ship will carry out. Additional ships will take some five days to reach, hence the Indian Navy can seek the aid of other Navies in the areas. A flotilla of European and US-led Navies is on patrol close by and the international Navies usually cooperate with each other at high seas.
Authorities are tight-lipped about the possible options that the government will exercise to free the remaining seven hostages. A “swap deal” is not one of the options on the table. The last time India was involved in the hostage “swap deal” was in Kandahar 1999 when three terrorists were released to free 150 passengers of the Indian Airlines flight IC-814 taken hostage by pro-Taliban militants.
Meanwhile, this morning the MV Asphalt Venture owners appealed to Somali pirates to keep their word and release the vessels remaining seven Indian sailors. The owners have expressed deep disappointment over the pirates reneging on their word. This is despite meeting all demands of the negotiated settlement and paying the mutually agreed ransom, an official statement issued by the company said.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Rowing Through Pirate Waters?
As Reported HERE
(Keeping her route a secret?)
(Keeping her route a secret?)
British woman sets off on solo Indian Ocean row
A British woman who last year become the first to row solo across the Pacific Ocean has set off on an attempt to cross the Indian Ocean.
Roz Savage, from London, left Fremantle on the coast of Western Australia on Wednesday and will not reach land again for four months.
She aims to row across 4,000 miles of open ocean without stopping in her tiny 23-foot craft with just two satellite phones connecting her to the outside world.
This is the third leg of a round-the-world journey that the 43-year-old has embarked on to raise awareness of the damage humans are doing to the environment when they pollute the oceans.
So far she had had to be rescued by a coastguard, and almost drowned in the pacific when she became separated from her raft.
However, the Indian Ocean has the threat of pirates. In an attempt to avoid an encounter with anyone who would want to steal her high-tech boat or take her hostage, Miss Savage changed her original plan to row to Mumbai, which would have taken her through a pirate-riddled region off the Somali coast, and is keeping her route and destination a secret.
Friday, April 8, 2011
MV SUSAN K pirated only 35 nautical miles from the Omani coastline
As Reported by EUNAVFOR
In the early morning of 8 April, the General Cargo ship MV SUSAN K was pirated approximately 200 nautical miles North-East of Salalah, Oman; a location only 35 nautical miles from the Omani coastline.
The vessel was attacked and boarded by at least 10 pirates although exact details of the attack are not known at this time.
The Antigua & Barbuda flagged and German owned vessel was on its way to Port Sudan (Sudan) from Mumbai (India) when it was attacked. The MV SUSAN K has a crew of 10 (4 Ukraine and 6 Filipino). There is no further information about the crew at present.
The MV SUSAN K was registered with MSC(HOA) and was reporting to UKMTO. EUNAVFOR are continuing to monitor the situation.
In the early morning of 8 April, the General Cargo ship MV SUSAN K was pirated approximately 200 nautical miles North-East of Salalah, Oman; a location only 35 nautical miles from the Omani coastline.
The vessel was attacked and boarded by at least 10 pirates although exact details of the attack are not known at this time.
The Antigua & Barbuda flagged and German owned vessel was on its way to Port Sudan (Sudan) from Mumbai (India) when it was attacked. The MV SUSAN K has a crew of 10 (4 Ukraine and 6 Filipino). There is no further information about the crew at present.
The MV SUSAN K was registered with MSC(HOA) and was reporting to UKMTO. EUNAVFOR are continuing to monitor the situation.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Indian Navy Captures 61 Pirates
As Reported HERE
Two Indian navy ships also rescued 13 crew members from the fishing boat Sunday night, nearly 695 miles (1,100 kilometers) off Kochi in southern India, the statement said.
The pirates had hijacked the Mozambique-flagged Vega 5 in December and had used it as a mother ship — a base from which they staged several attacks in the vast waters between East Africa and India.
A patrol aircraft spotted the mother ship Friday while responding to another vessel reporting a pirate attack, the Indian navy said. The pirates aborted the hijacking attempt and tried to escape in the mother ship.
When the Indian ships closed in Sunday night, the pirates fired on them. The hijacked vessel caught fire when the Indian navy returned fire, the navy said.
The pirates as well as the crew members jumped into the sea from the burning vessel, but were taken out by Indian sailors, the statement said.
The pirates were carrying about 80 to 90 small arms or rifles and a few heavier weapons, likely rocket-propelled grenades, it said. The statement did not describe any casualties among the navy, the fishermen or the pirates in Sunday's clash.
The navy was checking whether the pirates were from Somalia or Yemen. They were being taken to Mumbai, India's financial capital, to be prosecuted for attacking the Indian ships.
Piracy has plagued the shipping industry off East Africa for years, but violence and ransom demands have escalated in recent months. Pirates held some 30 ships and more than 660 hostages as of February.
This was the third anti-piracy operation by the Indian navy this year. It captured 28 Somali pirates last month and another 15 in January. Both groups also are to be prosecuted in Mumbai.
Indian warships have been escorting merchant ships as part of international anti-piracy surveillance in the area since 2008.
Several nations, including the United States, are prosecuting pirate suspects their militaries captured but other suspects have been released as countries weigh legal issues and other factors.
The prosecutions, the growth of criminal gangs participating in piracy and the ever-increasing ransoms have heightened confrontations.
Five Puntland security forces and two pirates were killed earlier this month during a failed attempt to rescue Danish captives taken from their hijacked yacht to a pirate stronghold in the semiautonomous northern region of Somalia.
Weeks earlier, four Americans on a hijacked yacht were killed by pirates under circumstances that are still unclear. A U.S. Navy destroyer was shadowing the captured boat at the time, and 15 pirate suspects were taken into custody after the gunfire.
Indian navy captures 61 pirates in Arabian Sea
NEW DELHI – The Indian navy captured 61 pirates who jumped into the Arabian Sea to flee a gunfight and fire on the hijacked ship from which they had staged several attacks, a navy statement said Monday.
Two Indian navy ships also rescued 13 crew members from the fishing boat Sunday night, nearly 695 miles (1,100 kilometers) off Kochi in southern India, the statement said.
The pirates had hijacked the Mozambique-flagged Vega 5 in December and had used it as a mother ship — a base from which they staged several attacks in the vast waters between East Africa and India.
A patrol aircraft spotted the mother ship Friday while responding to another vessel reporting a pirate attack, the Indian navy said. The pirates aborted the hijacking attempt and tried to escape in the mother ship.
When the Indian ships closed in Sunday night, the pirates fired on them. The hijacked vessel caught fire when the Indian navy returned fire, the navy said.
The pirates as well as the crew members jumped into the sea from the burning vessel, but were taken out by Indian sailors, the statement said.
The pirates were carrying about 80 to 90 small arms or rifles and a few heavier weapons, likely rocket-propelled grenades, it said. The statement did not describe any casualties among the navy, the fishermen or the pirates in Sunday's clash.
The navy was checking whether the pirates were from Somalia or Yemen. They were being taken to Mumbai, India's financial capital, to be prosecuted for attacking the Indian ships.
Piracy has plagued the shipping industry off East Africa for years, but violence and ransom demands have escalated in recent months. Pirates held some 30 ships and more than 660 hostages as of February.
This was the third anti-piracy operation by the Indian navy this year. It captured 28 Somali pirates last month and another 15 in January. Both groups also are to be prosecuted in Mumbai.
Indian warships have been escorting merchant ships as part of international anti-piracy surveillance in the area since 2008.
Several nations, including the United States, are prosecuting pirate suspects their militaries captured but other suspects have been released as countries weigh legal issues and other factors.
The prosecutions, the growth of criminal gangs participating in piracy and the ever-increasing ransoms have heightened confrontations.
Five Puntland security forces and two pirates were killed earlier this month during a failed attempt to rescue Danish captives taken from their hijacked yacht to a pirate stronghold in the semiautonomous northern region of Somalia.
Weeks earlier, four Americans on a hijacked yacht were killed by pirates under circumstances that are still unclear. A U.S. Navy destroyer was shadowing the captured boat at the time, and 15 pirate suspects were taken into custody after the gunfire.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
