Comments on: Let the UN lead an air war against piracy http://www.giornaledibarganews.com/2009/04/21/let-the-un-lead-an-air-war-against-piracy/ busily putting barga on the map Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:24:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: beauly http://www.giornaledibarganews.com/2009/04/21/let-the-un-lead-an-air-war-against-piracy/#comment-1809 beauly Wed, 22 Apr 2009 15:18:55 +0000 http://www.giornaledibarganews.com/?p=8705#comment-1809 Yes fviviano. I did not take there to be a suggestion of guns aboard... way too much hassle for ship owners and ships... refused in certain ports if carrying arms etc. Also I did pick up on the "reported" aspect, in fact that was the main point I was driving at. When a ship equipped with special communications gear has a group of pirates swarming up the side, or at least along side, call out for the air support. What happens then? Within minutes the F-15's are screeching over head, now what? I did like the idea that of using the super sonic megaphone that would shout out in 100's of languages to surround boats (fishing and potential pirates) that if any one of them came near a ship passing through that they would be 'considered' to be a pirate ship and treated as such. Your point about; "the potential precedent of an international body, backed by such normally antagonistic powers as Russia, NATO and China, undertaking police action in the common defense of mutual interests." This is where things are very interesting... because I think that you are suggesting that the Pirate effort could almost be an excuse to bring together an otherwise antagonistic group... in a "common" cause... which would have far broader implications (positive) than dealing with small groups of desperates invloved in piracy. Yes fviviano. I did not take there to be a suggestion of guns aboard… way too much hassle for ship owners and ships… refused in certain ports if carrying arms etc.

Also I did pick up on the “reported” aspect, in fact that was the main point I was driving at. When a ship equipped with special communications gear has a group of pirates swarming up the side, or at least along side, call out for the air support. What happens then? Within minutes the F-15′s are screeching over head, now what? I did like the idea that of using the super sonic megaphone that would shout out in 100′s of languages to surround boats (fishing and potential pirates) that if any one of them came near a ship passing through that they would be ‘considered’ to be a pirate ship and treated as such.

Your point about;

“the potential precedent of an international body, backed by such normally antagonistic powers as Russia, NATO and China, undertaking police action in the common defense of mutual interests.”

This is where things are very interesting… because I think that you are suggesting that the Pirate effort could almost be an excuse to bring together an otherwise antagonistic group… in a “common” cause… which would have far broader implications (positive) than dealing with small groups of desperates invloved in piracy.

]]> By: fviviano http://www.giornaledibarganews.com/2009/04/21/let-the-un-lead-an-air-war-against-piracy/#comment-1808 fviviano Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:25:39 +0000 http://www.giornaledibarganews.com/?p=8705#comment-1808 Two points, caro Beauly. First, the suggestion is not at all to put guns into the hands of merchant sailors, which would only lead to needless bloodshed. It is to send professionally trained fliers over the reported scene of an assault as quickly as possible. The second point is made by that word “reported” — the squadron would be responding to a ship in distress, and not idly patrolling for “suspicious” vessels that may turn out to be fishing boats. It’s worth reiterating that a unanimous UN resolution, backed by the entire Security Council, has endorsed using “all means necessary” to combat piracy off the coast of Somalia. Air power is the most effective, most rapid, least costly answer. But far more important is the potential precedent of an international body, backed by such normally antagonistic powers as Russia, NATO and China, undertaking police action in the common defense of mutual interests. Opportunities like this present themselves very, very rarely. No one can afford the ridiculous spectacle of world trade held at ransom by a few speedboats full of small-time thugs. Every contemporary head of state, from Moscow and Beijing to Brussels and Washington — including Mr. Harper up there in Ottawa — recognizes this, and is on board for joint operations. A fleet of 20 warships from 20 countries already proves it. Air power would simply improve, quite significantly, on an existing mandate. Two points, caro Beauly. First, the suggestion is not at all to put guns into the hands of merchant sailors, which would only lead to needless bloodshed. It is to send professionally trained fliers over the reported scene of an assault as quickly as possible. The second point is made by that word “reported” — the squadron would be responding to a ship in distress, and not idly patrolling for “suspicious” vessels that may turn out to be fishing boats. It’s worth reiterating that a unanimous UN resolution, backed by the entire Security Council, has endorsed using “all means necessary” to combat piracy off the coast of Somalia. Air power is the most effective, most rapid, least costly answer. But far more important is the potential precedent of an international body, backed by such normally antagonistic powers as Russia, NATO and China, undertaking police action in the common defense of mutual interests. Opportunities like this present themselves very, very rarely. No one can afford the ridiculous spectacle of world trade held at ransom by a few speedboats full of small-time thugs. Every contemporary head of state, from Moscow and Beijing to Brussels and Washington — including Mr. Harper up there in Ottawa — recognizes this, and is on board for joint operations. A fleet of 20 warships from 20 countries already proves it. Air power would simply improve, quite significantly, on an existing mandate.

]]> By: beauly http://www.giornaledibarganews.com/2009/04/21/let-the-un-lead-an-air-war-against-piracy/#comment-1807 beauly Wed, 22 Apr 2009 00:12:51 +0000 http://www.giornaledibarganews.com/?p=8705#comment-1807 While I do think that "international policing", has tremendous merit, indeed Canada has long been a supporter of and a participant in NATO and UN police forces around the world, I would submit that unleashing "Supersonic air power" on pirates would require a certain nuance at best. "A single missile from an American F-15, French Mirage or Russian Sukhoi fighter would almost certainly put paid to the pirates" Yes and a single missile would also destroy a small fishing boat mistaken for pirates as well. I have to say that as I watched the freighter Maersk Alabama scenario unfold I more than once found myself saying; "why can't we just blast these guys out of the water!!"? Which is not a normal response from me. But I have also heard much in recent days about ship owners working on alternative means to protect their ships from pirate attacks, and not a single one included guns. Water canons, slippery foam sprayed on decks, and devices that could deliver audible messages that could be heard for several miles warning that any ship (pirate or fishing) that came close would be treated as pirate ship, are but a few of the suggestions. My take on this is that "supersonic air power" may not be the only solution. While I do think that “international policing”, has tremendous merit, indeed Canada has long been a supporter of and a participant in NATO and UN police forces around the world, I would submit that unleashing “Supersonic air power” on pirates would require a certain nuance at best.

“A single missile from an American F-15, French Mirage or Russian Sukhoi fighter would almost certainly put paid to the pirates”

Yes and a single missile would also destroy a small fishing boat mistaken for pirates as well.

I have to say that as I watched the freighter Maersk Alabama scenario unfold I more than once found myself saying; “why can’t we just blast these guys out of the water!!”? Which is not a normal response from me. But I have also heard much in recent days about ship owners working on alternative means to protect their ships from pirate attacks, and not a single one included guns. Water canons, slippery foam sprayed on decks, and devices that could deliver audible messages that could be heard for several miles warning that any ship (pirate or fishing) that came close would be treated as pirate ship, are but a few of the suggestions.

My take on this is that “supersonic air power” may not be the only solution.

]]>