Pirate Busters - American Shipper

TRANSPORT / OCEAN
• Travel at low speed.
• Have low freeboard (distance
from waterline to main
open deck).
• Have inadequate response
planning and procedures in place.
• Do not maintain a high state
of alert or signal that they have
self-protective capabilities.
• Are slow to respond to an
attack.
Most attempted ship raids have
been repulsed by crews, who have
planned, trained and employed
passive counter measures such
as zig-zag maneuvers, fire hoses, night
vision optics, transiting at night and even
dummies posted at the rails to simulate
additional lookouts.
Some vessel operators have employed
unarmed — and in a few instances, armed
— security forces to help set up defensive
tactics and repulse attacks while transiting
the region. Most operators are reluctant
to use armed security because of liability
concerns if a guard injures or kills someone,
a maze of differing firearms restrictions
among international ports, and a potential
for more violent pirate responses.
The U.S. government should press other
flag-nations to ensure that ocean carriers
comply with the International Ship and Port
Facility Security Code and adopt best security
practices, according to a recent report
on piracy from the Heritage Foundation.
In May, the U.S. Coast Guard issued a
security directive requiring U.S.-flagged
vessels to conduct risk assessments of their
vessels, develop anti-piracy plans, and
establish communications with military
forces in the area. The sea service recommended
the use of several non-lethal
precautions and that the industry should
consider supplementing crews with armed
or unarmed security personnel.
Many ocean carriers are betting on
the low odds of pirate attack rather than
spending heavily on security measures
because the shipping industry, which has
modest margins even in the best of times,
is being ravaged by the global recession
and low rates.
Nonetheless, for carriers operating
around the Gulf of Aden costs have risen
through higher insurance premiums, higher
fuel costs and fewer revenue-making trips
for the limited number of tankers and other
high-risk vessels sent around Africa rather
than through the Suez Canal short cut, and
ransoms in the $1 million to $2 million
range for captured ships.
One tactic companies have neglected
so far is to hire private security vessels to
serve as a “picket” for commercial shipping.
32 AMERICAN SHIPPER: OCTOBER 2009
Many ocean carriers are betting
on the low odds of pirate attack rather
than spending heavily on security
measures because the shipping industry,
which has modest margins even
in the best of times is being ravaged
by the global recession and low rates.
Private escorts could interdict pirate
ships, chase them away from commercial
vessels and then prevent the attack skiffs
from rejoining their mother ship by using
non-lethal means to incapacitate or deter
the pirate craft, the Heritage Foundation
report said, without any reference to the
potential cost of such an option compared
to onboard security.
Private security firms Glenn Defence
Marine Asia and Background Asia Risk
Solutions, in particular, provided vessel
escorts during the height of the piracy
scourge in the busy Straits of Malacca,
according to Patrick Cullen, an expert on
private military companies. Piracy has
markedly declined there since 2005 after
the littoral states — Indonesia, Malaysia
and Singapore — made a concerted effort
with help from the international community
to beef up ocean and air security patrols.
Blackwater USA, the notorious private
security firm that recently changed its
name to Xe Services LLC, saw a business
opportunity to protect cargo vessels in the
Gulf of Aden and two years ago invested
in a security ship and crew. It bought and
refurbished a 40-year-old National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration vessel
outfitted with inflatable speed boats with
rigged hulls, hand-launched unmanned
aerial vehicles and a landing pad capable
of handling a couple of small
helicopters for surveillance and
forward defense.
The venture was shut down because
of lack of interest from ship
owners, partly due to costs; ship
owners’ reluctance to do business
with a security contractor whose
armed guards were accused of
using excessive force in several
deadly incidents in Iraq; and the
fact that its ship, the McArthur,
was too slow and couldn’t keep
up with the vessels it needed to
escort, according to insurance
and private security industry experts.
French security firm Secopex also provides
armed onboard security teams and
vessel escorts, according to its Web site.
Escorting ships is a traditional state navy
responsibility. International forces have
set up patrolled transit lanes in the Gulf
of Aden and offered a limited number of
scheduled escorts through the waterway.
The lack of demand for security boats
to shadow cargo ships is a function of the
available naval presence and the relatively
small number of attacks, said Claude Berube,
an instructor in the political science division
at the U.S. Naval Academy, in an interview.
Private escort ships can provide armed
security hundreds or thousands of meters
from the vessel, eliminating having armed
riders onboard, which ship operators believe
could escalate violence and threaten
their ships, crews and insurance rates.
But the escort ships are not a viable option
unless pirate attacks substantially increase
or naval force protection decreases, Berube
said. At that point, shipping companies
would have to undertake a cost-benefit
analysis to see whether a guard ship was
worthwhile.
“I don’t think the level of piracy has
reached the level where private escort ships
would be affordable to private shipping
companies. So there’s the theoretical aspect
The U.S. government significantly increased its focus on Somali pirate
attacks after the U.S.-flag Maersk Alabama was hijacked and required a
military rescue of its captain last spring.