America has been dealing with piracy since the founding of the country. I know that to many people this is quite a shock, so let me put this into perspective. Before Paris Hilton, Brad Pitt, radio, TV, and Starbucks we had a man who ran the country who was a pretty sharp guy. His name was George Washington. George came into an office that had never existed before. He was a “President”, the Boss of a whole country. Not King or Lord but a guy elected by a whole bunch of, farmers, fishermen, and clerks to take care of them and be honest.
American were not thought well of, just like when George W. Bush was in office. Our country’s ships operating in the Mediterranean were being taken by Barbary pirates and held for ransom, much like today’s pirates are doing with ships in the Gulf of Aden and the off the coast of Somalia. Washington had six ships-of-the-line built to protect American interests. Other countries just paid the pirates tribute and went back to work. We could not pay pirates because we did not have any money; this country started out being pretty poor. Anyway, the extra ships worked, and a few Marines did the rest and we no longer had a pirate problem.
Today we are back to square one, which proves history does indeed recycle. Here, the difference is in clear thinking. Washington said, “Sink their ships and kill the pirates.” Our guys today are bound by a hundred ropes that all demand inaction – this in spite of a few hundred international laws put in effect since the1780s.
On November 5, 2005, a bunch of poor, ignorant, Somalia pirates fired on and almost captured a luxury cruise ship, the SS Seabourn Spirit (a tree-hugger of a name if there ever was one). The ship was fast, the crew was scared out of its wits, and they evaded their would-be captors and sailed away unharmed. In less than a year, the pirates came back and took over an Indian dhow on the trade route from India to Africa. These 10 pirates had automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades (RPG). The USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG-81) happened on the dhow and took action, capturing the pirates and freeing their hostages.
There are laws on the books going back over 200 years addressing this problem. America had a law in effect in 1815-23 called title 18 of the U.S. Code. The skipper of the Churchill cited this law to apprehend the pirates and turn them over to the court system of Kenya. The pirates got seven years in a really brutal prison system. This gives me amusement today when public figures are concerned about the steps required to handle pirates.
You don’t handle pirates – you hang them.
The Swedes started raising a ruckus in 1983 to the Maritime Safety Committee. They based their concerns on a myriad of international laws of the sea being adopted by the world community of nations. It started in 1958 with the convention of the High Seas and continued with the United Nations Convention of 1982, “Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).” To avoid the boredom of citing all these laws, let’s just say that we now have more laws then we have pirates. Everybody and his brother approved a measure to prevent acts of piracy against ships.
In 1986, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) came up with resolution A.545 (13) which said piracy is illegal. Duh!!! They called this Circular 443, “Measures to Prevent Unlawful Acts Against Passengers and Crew On Board Ships.” These idiots set a time frame, “which applied to passenger ship on voyages of 24 hours or more, and port facilities that service those vessels.” What the hell does this mean? If you are a crewman or passenger and get snagged by pirates in 18 hours, that’s OK? They can kill you and it’s not a foul? If you’re in port, can the pirates call time out while they kill people?
There is an old joke that goes like this.
Question: What do you call 20, 000 lawyers being dropped into the sea?
Answer: A good start
Click here to read Part II of this two-part article.
Joe Hinds is the author of The Ship Killers about the evolution of Motor Torpedo Boats.
Related Articles |
Carolyn A. Frank said:
You seem to be insinuating that the international inaction against the Somalian pirates is due to laws and yet when has that ever stopped the US or Israel from action in the past ?
No, I believe the inaction is more ominous than that. Once more we are watching something being allowed to play out in order to get the desired result and “the plan” can continue. Just stand on a polluted Somalian beach and let your gaze travel across the water to find who is orchestrating this latest show.
April 10th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
Frank Chadwick said:
Joseph,
This is a big problem, no doubt, and you raise some important concerns. I honestly think you weaken your case, however, when you distort IMO legal rulings just so you can call them idiots.
The IMO never suggested that anyone could kill someone in or close to a harbor and it’s “okay.” But crimes in or near a harbor are covered by the laws of the nation in which the harbor resides. If someone breaks into a boat in a harbor and steals things, it’s not piracy — it’s burglary. If someone kills someone on a boat in a harbor, it’s not okay, but it’s not piracy either — it’s murder, and the local police deal with it.
The sticky part of international maritime law is defining when a vessel stops being subject to the laws of its port of embarkation and becomes subject to the international law of the high seas. Law requires precision; it’s not enough to say, “We all know what that means,” especially when we are talking about hanging people for crossing a line, because as soon as we do, some zealous prosecutor will start hanging people for “piracy” who burglarize a moored houseboat at Dinner Key Marina in Miami.
So let’s not make a difficult and complicated problem even more so by damning lawyers for just doing their job.
Frank Chadwick
April 11th, 2009 at 8:02 am
Peter Suciu said:
As a child I loved the idea of pirates. Movies such as “Captain Blood” and of course Disney World and that wonderful ride. Sorry, but the latest films don’t do it justice. They had to throw in monsters and magic, because somehow a realistic pirate movie wouldn’t work today.
But this is the problem with the Somali pirates. As soon as the media covers this story, we see Johnny Depp or another character from the films instead of dirty bandit of the seas from the African Horn. And I say this as a journalist, so I understand why the media needs to stick to the romantic view. It draws in the viewer/reader.
So maybe the first step is dropping the P word entirely. Yes, pirates go back much further than the Spanish Main and well beyond the Caribbean. But let’s drop the moniker. The word has become too romanticized, too historical and simply too common.
These are fishermen who couldn’t make enough money and picked up an AK-47 instead. The guns are there because the bandits have taken control of the land, and now it spreading to the sea.
As for law, in most nations kidnapping is a serious offense and that is what these bandits are doing. They aren’t plundering the ships for cargo, they’re basically holding the ships for ransom. And as this is happening in international waters any nation should feel free to respond.
In the good old days, whether it was anicent Rome or 17th century North Carolina, pirates were hanged when caught. But maybe now hanging is too good. We don’t need to hang them, we can blast them out of the water and if they can swim to shore we’ll let them try again. If not, well one less bandit.
Of course some will say, “but these men are turning to this because they can’t fish anymore and they need to food for their families.” That’s true, but America is seeing hard times and we wouldn’t be happy if someone starting breaking into houses to feed their family or robbed banks to buy food. The days of “Robin Hood” wouldn’t fly here, so these wannabe Johnny Depps should understand that a bandit is a bandit.
April 11th, 2009 at 10:35 am
Kirk said:
Carol-
The idea we are orchestrating a “plan” of inaction against piracy so we can achieve something in the long run is ludicrous. Its the same 1960’s anti-establishment rhetoric that hasn’t died along with the times. I don’t get how these conspiracy nuts still have such a huge following. Although I guess it is alot less interesting to believe the government’s agenda is typically for good.
April 13th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
dangerclose said:
Peter
I understand you perspective, but I have to disagree on the assessment that the “pirates” are just poor fishermen. Perhaps this latest incident was undertaken by amateurs, but don’t kid yourself, at the core of this issue are professionals. The coordination needed to accomplish a seaborne assault of a vessel underway is significant.
But I must say that I agree with your assessment that if you engage in piracy on the high seas you get whatever happens to you.
As far as a conspiracy goes I think you simplify the issue to almost juvenile terms. The issue is more complex than hidden agendas. There are hidden agendas everywhere. As a nation we failed when we ran away from Somalia we not only invited attack, but we left more of a mess than when we started. The only sure way to quell the piracy is to occupy the country and impose law. Not a very politically correct idea, but true none the less. Before the screaming starts, I am not suggesting the USA does this, maybe France can step and start shouldering some weight. The author of the article seems to suggest that we have legislated the issue to incapacity. Unfortunately maritime law tends to be that way. But in the days of Presley O’Bannon there was no real community of nations, so we could engage in some might makes right solutions. That just isn’t the situation today. It’s easy to cast blame and to support solutions that sound good but are not realistic, it’s a little harder to come up with a solution. We all think that we are the latter and not the former.
April 14th, 2009 at 8:59 am
dangerclose said:
Sorry
Second part of my reply was directed to Carol’s statement.
April 14th, 2009 at 9:00 am
Joseph Hinds said:
Pete, We had a momentary power failure and lost you. So, where was I? Damned if I know but it may have gone something like this. The poverty of Somalia can never be downplayed. They are about one inch above my pet turtle, Roscoe Barns.
Once these ‘Poor Little Guys” pick up a gun they are killers. They are not little guys any longer. They are truly killers and criminals. There is no poor in the equation.
For once we had a president who had the brains and guts to tell his people to do the right thing. As in, “What ever it takes”. That freed up the skipper to do his job as he SAW FIT not spending time looking for the the rule book to tell him what not to do.
Peter, thank you for taking the time to read and respond to this piece.
My Regards,
Joe
April 14th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Joseph Hinds said:
Carolyn, Thank you for being involved in this problem. You have a point in that Somalia is a pretty downtrodden place to try and live. That little piece of Africa has more then its fair share of big people, little people, good guys and bad guys. Big or small is not position to try to hang onto, The people with the guns, or the money to buy the guns, are the bad guys.
So far as international conspiracies go, I can’t get my mind to go there. Thank you for your response and I hope to hear youer opinion again.
Regards,
Joe
April 14th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Joseph Hinds said:
Hi Frank, Thanks for the participation to my blog. I do agree with you about not blaming the IMO to a degree. I also spent several years in the Marines and Navy and was witness to two types of CO’s. Those who read the book of rules nightly and those who knew enough to act on their own judgment. Believe, a boss who runs on common sense is much easier to work for then the other type.
Obama gave the CO’s of the ships the go-ahead to do, “What ever it takes”. They did their jobs and it worked because it was the right thing to do. You may see American crewed vessels leaving port with fully armed crews. Because it’s a real good idea.
The ship owners are more concerned about not incurring corrective measures then losing crewmen. To these guys I would say, when one of their vessels is captured, “Go get your own damned boat”.
Thanks for chiming in Frank. Regards, Joe
April 14th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Frank Chadwick said:
Joe,
It’s my understanding that one of the main barriers standing in the way of arming crews on these vessels has been the insurance companies, not the vessel owners. If the insurance companies won’t insure a vessel, it’s not going to sail. It has apparently been their judgment — right or wrong — that the potential losses from fire fights attempting to repell pirates would exceed the direct payments they have been making to the pirates. I suspect that may change with a higher naval presence in the region, but if it does not, then either somebody’s government (i.e. ours) is going to have to step in as an insurer of last resort, or the idea of arming crews is going to be a non-starter. Have you heard anything as to how that is shaking out?
April 14th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Joseph Hinds said:
I don’t think arming crews is a good idea-Except for our crews that have gone thorough the Maritime Academy or ex-service personal. The guys on the Alabama were all (or mostly all) trained in one fashion or another. They had small arms training and anti-terrorist drills. They also had a Captain with brains and guts.
Generally, ships hire senior staff with the proper pares and credentials. The bulk of the most ships crews (particularly 3rd world types) are just warm bodies that do not need to think. They are also about hopeless to train.
Shipping companies need to take measures to protect their own ships.I have a Part III about this in a day or so. Thank you for the time to talk Frank.
Joe
April 16th, 2009 at 5:04 am
john harrison said:
The commments about the Seaborn ship are both unfounded and reprehensible, as well as being factually false. I met the captain of the Seaborn ship about 6 months before the attack. We actually discussed the possibility of a pirate attack. The captain had a plan of response. While I have no doubt that many were afraid at the confrontation, they had a plan, they executed the plan, and the attack was completely frustrated. This deserves congratulations, not the gratuitous insults of the article. Shame. Brave men and women deserve better. Shame.
July 14th, 2009 at 4:48 pm