South China Sea Pirates: Chemical Tanker Robbed

From IMB's Live Piracy Report:

05.09.2010: 0305 LT: Posn: 03:14.2N – 105:17.2E: Off Mangkai Island: South China Sea.

Four pirates armed with long knives boarded a chemical tanker underway. They took hostage duty bridge crew and duty anti piracy watch crew and proceeded to masters cabin. Pirates stole ships cash and escaped. Ship sent a distress message.

This is another in a string of attacks in this area (see here), prompting an IMB warning here:

Indonesia : Anambas / Natuna / Mangkai islands area. Attacks are increasing. Pirates normally armed with guns / knives and / or machetes. Generally be vigilant in other areas. Many attacks may have gone unreported.

Somali Pirates: Indian warship stops a hijack

Reported here:

Somali and Yemeni pirates' attempt to hijack for ransom Indian cargo vessels sailing off the Somalia coast was thwarted by an Indian warship, a navy spokesperson said here today.

INS Delhi, a guided missile destroyer, was assisting the merchant ships that were sailing through the Gulf of Aden when the armed sea brigands made the attempt on one of the 12 ships in the formation yesterday.

The pirates' boat was intercepted by the Indian warship that deployed a helicopter with marine commandos, who seized a cache of weapons and offloaded the fuel and left their boat adrift, the spokesperson said.

This was the 16th piracy attack on merchant vessels in the Gulf of Aden that was prevented by the Indian warships that have been deployed there since October 2008.

The attack took place in the Internationally Recommended Transit Corridor (IRTC), described here as being:

4. THE IRTC EAST BOUND LANE BEGINS AT 045 EAST BETWEEN 11 48 NORTH AND 11 53 NORTH. THE LANE IS ORIENTED ALONG A STRAIGHT LINE COURSE OF 072 DEGREES AND TERMINATES AT 053 DEGREES EAST BETWEEN 14 18 NORTH AND 14 23 NORTH. THE IRTC WEST BOUND LANE BEGINS AT 053 DEGREES EAST BETWEEN 14 25 NORTH AND 14 30 NORTH. THE LANE IS ORIENTED ALONG A STRAIGHT LINE COURSE OF 252 AND TERMINATES AT 045 DEGREES EAST BETWEEN 11 55 NORTH AND 12 00 NORTH.

Map from here.

Somali Pirates: The UN offers Seven Options

Reported by the AP as UN chief offers anti-piracy options :

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon offered the Security Council seven options for grappling with the piracy problem, ranging from simple legal support for individual nations to a full international court established by the council, the U.N.'s most powerful body.

An effort instigated by the Russians, no less.

The seven options:

1. basic support for nations in prosecuting suspected pirates; 
2. establishment of a Somali court, applying Somali law, in a third state in the region; 
3. two variants for helping a regional state or states to establish a special court inside its existing judicial system to conduct piracy trials;
4. a regional court establishment by regional states and the African Union;
5. an international "hybrid" tribunal with national participation by a state in the region;
6. a full internatinal tribunal, established by the Security Council.

Number 3 counts as two options, I gather, thus giving a total of 7.

I suppose it might be useful to have an internationally recognized definition of piracy and/or armed assault at sea and some minimal level  of required evidence needed to prove attempted piracy.

Further, there has to be some system in which sworn video evidence of mariners may be used in court so that shipping companies will not be forced to send deck hand or officers from remote corners of the planet to testify against "suspects."

Make it too hard to get the captured pirates to trial and you will just get a continuation of the current situation - a "catch and release" program for misguided Somali youth.  Though some forms of this treatment are more harsh than others - see here.

My own personal option is a blockade of known Somali pirate ports and an announcement of "no warning shots" by the various international naval units in the area if a small boat is found firing on a ship at sea. Aim for the motors on the boat and let the survivors drift home. They better have life jackets and oars.

Of course, this probably violates their human rights.

I have an idea for a low-cost anti-pirate vessel with just the right weapon to take out small boats:

Put a UN flag on it.

Swarm Tactics: Training Aid for Defense

 Meggitt Canada has developed a system to assist modern naval forces to train against "swarm tactics" as set out in a press release here:

Meggitt Training Systems Canada, the world’s leading naval target company, has conducted the world’s first large-scale ‘swarmex’ demonstration.
The simulation of a real-world threat of swarming fast in-shore attack craft (FIACs) was designed to create a maritime self-protection training scenario for one or more naval ships.
Conducted at Canadian Forces Base Esquimalt in British Columbia, the swarmex involved the simultaneous operation over seven hours of 16 Meggitt Hammerhead boat targets controlled on a single radio frequency using Meggitt’s universal target control station.
A FIAC threat arises when a hostile force fields a significant number of small lightly-armed vessels to overwhelm the defences of larger vessels or deny them access to coastal waters.   Since the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, many navies have invested heavily in sensors and weapon systems to defend their vessels from such attacks.  Until this swarmex demonstration, the tools did not exist to conduct live fire exercises to counter target swarms.
Live exercise planned
The swarmex demonstration, in which the Hammerhead flotilla was controlled in a safe, effective and efficient manner, is a significant technical achievement, enabling Meggitt to offer sophisticated FIAC threat replication training services worldwide.  The Canadian Navy has now asked Meggitt to support a major multi-national live-fire naval exercise using Hammerhead in 2011.
Hammerhead, an advanced unmanned surface vehicle target (USV-T) with an award-winning surface-effect hull that enables it to operate at over 35 knots in high sea states, is a derivative of Meggitt’s “Barracuda” naval target.  Barracuda, which has enjoyed extensive worldwide sales replicating the larger Fast Attack Craft (FAC) threat, is in service with the armed forces of Canada, Japan, Sweden, Korea and others.   Like Hammerhead, Barracuda can be controlled by Meggitt’s universal target control station.

Info on the "Barracuda" here.
 


Train like you'll fight. Then train some more.

"You won't rise to the occasion – you'll default to your level of training."

- Barrett Tillman

The Northeast Passage -Shorter, Faster, Avoids Somali Pirates and Adds to Maritime Security Concerns

Interesting look at an effect of global warming that may put a dent in piracy off Somalia found at "Bye pirates, hello Northeast Passage" :

Climate change may have delivered a solution to the risk faced by ships and crew passing through the waters of Gulf of Aden. A cargo ship bearing Hong Kong flag carrying 41,000 tons of iron ore will become part of maritime history as it sails from Norway to China through Russia's arctic passage instead of the pirate-infested Somalian waters.

Although Nordic Barents is not the first ship to pass through the Arctic wasteland, it becomes the first foreign-registered vessel allowed by Russia to make a voyage between two non-Russian ports. The ship's owner aims to prove that the route would become a viable alternative to the longer southern route from Europe to Asia. Nordic Barents is scheduled to leave the small Norwegian port of Kirkenes and head towards the Chinese port of Dalian. If the trip proves successful, the route enters one more step in competing against the Suez Canal sea route.

Yep, during the appropriate seasons -

A report of the first modern commercial voyage from the Barents Observer "Route through Northeast Passage faster than expected":

The first high-tonnage tanker to take the Northern Sea Route from Europe to Asia has arrived Pevek on the Chukotka Peninsula one day earlier than expected.

It took the 100 000 tons tanker “Baltica” 11 days to cover 2500 miles. The vessel is expected to arrive in Ningbo, China, in the first half of September, web site Portnews.ru reports.
***
The fact that the tanker has covered the distance in less time than expected, shows the potential of the Northern Sea Route when it comes to cutting back on transport time and increasing cost efficiency of oil and gas deliveries to Asia and regions in the Pacific Ocean, the ship owner Sovcomflot says.

See also here.

Not without risk, though, as The Old Salt Blog reports on a collision between two Russian ships on the route.

Naturally, this new route poses a lot of concerns, both environmental and, for the U.S., national security:

Arctic melting is leaving new coastline and waterways up to the north, but some Arctic strategy experts are concerned that polar ice is melting faster than U.S. military planners are gearing up for what an open-water arctic will mean for U.S. security.
***“If you think strategy relates somehow to means and investment in means then we don’t have a strategy,” said Robert Laird, a security consultant based in Washington and Paris. “You have five stakeholders in the Arctic,” he said. The U.S., Russia, Denmark, Norway and Canada each have Arctic territory. “The only country that’s not strategic in this is us.”

It's not like the U.S. Coast Guard has been silent on the ramifications of this situation- here are a couple of links to DoD Live Blogger Roundtables in which former Commandant Adm. Thad Allen discussed the situation: Part 1 and Part 2.

The U.S. has three (yes, only 3) ice breakers suitable for operating in the Arctic environment and two of those are over 30 years old.

There is a NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD -- 66 on "Arctic Region Policy":

National Security and Homeland Security Interests in the Arctic

1. The United States has broad and fundamental national security interests in the Arctic region and is prepared to operate either independently or in conjunction with other states to safeguard these interests. These interests include such matters as missile defense and early warning; deployment of sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence, and maritime security operations; and ensuring freedom of navigation and overflight.
2.The United States also has fundamental homeland security interests in preventing terrorist attacks and mitigating those criminal or hostile acts that could increase the United States vulnerability to terrorism in the Arctic region.
3.The Arctic region is primarily a maritime domain; as such, existing policies and authorities relating to maritime areas continue to apply, including those relating to law enforcement.[1] Human activity in the Arctic region is increasing and is projected to increase further in coming years. This requires the United States to assert a more active and influential national presence to protect its Arctic interests and to project sea power throughout the region.
4.The United States exercises authority in accordance with lawful claims of United States sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction in the Arctic region, including sovereignty within the territorial sea, sovereign rights and jurisdiction within the United States exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf, and appropriate control in the United States contiguous zone.
5. Freedom of the seas is a top national priority. The Northwest Passage is a strait used for international navigation, and the Northern Sea Route includes straits used for international navigation; the regime of transit passage applies to passage through those straits. Preserving the rights and duties relating to navigation and overflight in the Arctic region supports our ability to exercise these rights throughout the world, including through strategic straits.

The Spring 2010 issue of the Naval War College Review contains an article by Rear Admiral David W. Titley, U.S. Navy, and Courtney C. St. John, "Arctic Security Considerations and the U.S. Navy's Roadmap for the Arctic":

The Navy understands the wide range of security considerations in the Arctic region and that the effects of climate change in the Arctic will influence the geostrategic landscape.
***
While the Navy has a rich history in the Arctic, several challenges must be met
to ensure successful operations in the future. These include the lack of support
infrastructure and logistics support, environmental hazards such as drifting sea
ice and icing on exposed surfaces, and communications difficulties. Antiquated
nautical charts, drifting ice, low visibility, and the paucity of electronic and visual navigation aids hinder safety of navigation. A lack of coastal installations
also contributes to the difficulty of search and rescue (SAR) operations. The only American-owned deepwater port near the Arctic basin is Dutch Harbor, in the Aleutian Islands.

More on the Arctic Roadmap here. And a USNI article Arctic Melt: Reopening a Naval Frontier. Of course, the topic was raised in the Sea Services' A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower:

Climate change is gradually opening up the waters of the Arctic, not only to new resource development, but also to new shipping routes that may reshape the global transport system. While these developments offer opportunities for growth, they are potential sources of competition and conflict for access and natural resources.

Previous USNI Blog posts that are related: CHINA: Linking the South China Sea and the Arctic Ocean and Arctic Diplomatic Meet Gets Frosty.

UPDATE: China's Arctic claim "or claim jumping?"

I guess it's time to get busy. Where's the funding?

Earlier post on Russia's Arctic Sea ambitions here.

More on this later.
UPDATE: Northern Passage vs. Suez Passage:

Epic Failure of Juxtaposition

And CDR Salamander has it.

Was the author passive aggressive? Clueless? Filled with sarcasm?

Who was the releasing authority who let this get out?

A head will roll.






By the way, the term "dunce" is of Scottish origin. 

South China Sea Pirates: Tanker Attack 1 Sept 10

From the ICC CCS IMB Live Piracy Report:

01.09.2010: 0100 LT: Posn: 03:14.3N – 105:19.6E, Off Pulau Mangkai, South China Sea.

Six pirates armed with guns, knives and steel rods boarded a tanker underway. They entered the bridge and took hostage three crew members and tied up their hands. The pirates also took hostage master when he opened his cabin door. Pirates stole ships cash, crew and ship's properties before escaping.

This is the seventh attack on ships in this area since August 1 (see here) and since the beginning of 2010, there has been a surge in attacks in the area (red arrow on map below points to area of most recent attack):

 And, a slight revision to the ReCAAP map of attacks in the the area since 1 August 10:

 These attacks have led to calls to Indonesia to boost patrols in the area, as set out here:

An international maritime group urged Indonesia on Thursday to increase patrols in the South China Sea after pirates attacked nine vessels in less than three weeks.

The International Maritime Bureau said pirates armed with guns and machetes had robbed tankers and bulk carriers of cash and other valuables in the attacks off the Indonesian islands of Mangkai, Anambas and Natuna.

This brought the number of pirate attacks so far this year to 26 in the area, which is a transit route used by vessels heading southeast to the Singapore Straits or northwest to East Asia and the Pacific Ocean. Only seven attacks were reported all of last year.

The IMB is exactly right - while these are not the ship grabbing attacks like those conducted by Somali pirates, they are dangerous (3 sailors injured in August) and disruptive of a major sea lane.

The pirates, once again, are operating in an area where the territorial waters of two countries meet - Malaysia and Indonesia (Pulau Mangkai is Indonesian).

This may become important if Malaysia and Indonesia don't make an agreement covering the area, as noted in older post:  

Some Piracy Law from UNCLOS concerning the right of hot pursuit:

Article 105. Seizure of a pirate ship or aircraft
On the high seas, or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State, every State may seize a pirate ship or aircraft, or a ship or aircraft taken by piracy and under the control of pirates, and arrest the persons and seize the property on board. The courts of the State which carried out the seizure may decide upon the penalties to be imposed, and may also determine the action to be taken with regard to the ships, aircraft or property, subject to the rights of third parties acting in good faith.
***
Article 111. Right of hot pursuit
1. The hot pursuit of a foreign ship may be undertaken when the  competent authorities of the coastal State have good reason to believe  that the ship has violated the laws and regulations of that State.  Such pursuit must be commenced when the foreign ship or one of its  boats is within the internal waters, the archipelagic waters, the  territorial sea or the contiguous zone of the pursuing State, and may  only be continued ouside the territorial sea or the contiguous zone if  the pursuit has not been interrupted. It is not necessary that, at the  time when the foreign ship within the territorial sea or the  contiguous zone receives the order to stop, the ship giving the order  should likewise be within the territorial sea or the contiguous zone.  If the foreign ship is within a contiguous zone, as defined in article  33, the pursuit may only be undertaken if there has been a violation  of the rights for the protection of which the zone was established.

2. The right of hot pursuit shall apply mutatis mutandis to violations  in the exclusive economic zone or on the continental shelf, including  safety zones around continental shelf installations, of the laws and  regulations of the coastal State applicable in accordance with this  Convention to the exclusive economic zone or the continental shelf,  including such safety zones.

3. The right of hot pursuit ceases as soon as the ship pursued enters  the territorial sea of its own State or of a third State.
***

Naive you are . . .

Interesting read about a disconnect between the State Department and the Army about the possible consequences of that long ago invasion of Iraq at The Skeptical Bureaucrat: Odierno: "We Came In Naive".

And, yes, in my experience there is a tendency among the military to not play well with the DOS folks.

And vice-versa.

More's the pity.

Photo of the Day

From here:

Two MH-60S Sea Hawk helicopters transit between the aircraft carriers USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77) and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) while conducting a vertical replenishment transferring ammunition. George H.W. Bush is undergoing its first underway replenishment with another aircraft carrier. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Joshua D. Sheppard/Released)

Somali Pirates: August 2010 Attacks, NATO Warnings and Counter- Piracy

Poor sea conditions have slowed pirate activity in the Gulf of Aden and off the eastern Somali coast for the month of August. In addition, the number of international pirate-hunting naval forces is having an impact.

Multi-national efforts stops pirates, as reported here:

Japanese, EU and NATO forces cooperated on Sunday to intercept pirates who were preparing to attack ships in the Gulf of Aden, the NATO counter-piracy task force said.

A Japanese Maritime Self Defence (JMSDF) aircraft spotted a pirate skiff with seven suspected pirates on board and alerted a helicopter from the Danish warship Esbern Snare under NATO command, which intercepted the skiff.

"Subsequently the suspected pirates threw their weapons overboard and surrendered," a NATO statement, released in London, said.

An Italian helicopter from another vessel under NATO command provided support for the operation.

Crew members from an American warship, the USS Kauffman, also in NATO's counter-piracy operation, boarded the skiff and found a ladder pirates used to board ships "and other pirate-related paraphernalia," the statement added.

NATO August 2010 reports (purple= warning; orange= weapons fired; red = hijacking)

August. 28 2010

WARNING Gulf of Aden

Latitude: 12 17N Longitude: 04459E

Alert number 403 / 2010.

At 1449 UTC a Pirate Action Group consisting of ONE ARMED SKIFF was reported in position 12 17 N 044 59 E.

-----------------------------

August. 22 2010

WARNING Gulf of Aden

Latitude: 13 26N Longitude: 049 41E

Alert number 402 / 2010.

At 0417 UTC 22AUG a white skiff with weapons was reported in position 13 26N 049 41E.

-----------------------------

August. 19 2010

WARNING, Gulf of Aden

Latitude: 13 46N Longitude: 050 02E

Alert number 401 / 2010.

At 1007 UTC 19AUG a Pirate Action Group consisting of one skiff and one dhow was reported in position 13 46N 050 02E.

--------------------------------

18. August 2010

WARNING, Gulf of Aden

Latitude: 13 11 N Longitude: 049 06 E

Alert number 400 / 2010.

At 1453 UTC 18AUG a skiff was reported in position 13 11 N 049 06 E.

--------------------------------

17. August 2010

WARNING, Gulf of Aden

Latitude: 12 59N Longitude: 048 15E

Alert number 399 / 2010.

At 0434 UTC 17 AUG one skiff was reported in position 12 59N 048 15E

--------------------------------

9. August 2010

WARNING, Gulf of Aden

Latitude: 13 20N Longitude: 049 46E

Alert number 398 / 2010.

At 0513 UTC 1 skiff was reported attempting an approach to a merchant vessel in position 13 20 N 049 46E.

-----------------------------------

4. August 2010

WARNING Red Sea

Latitude: 15 48N Longitude: 041 25E

Alert number 396 / 2010.

At 1445 UTC 04 AUG 10 a merchant vessel was attacked by 5 white skiffs, each with 7 POB, in position 15 48N 041 25E. Weapons were fired.

------------------------------

3. August 2010

WARNING, Pirate Attack, Gulf of Aden / IRTC

Latitude: 12 56N, Longitude: 048 08E

Alert number 395 / 2010.

At 0324 UTC 03 AUG 10 merchant vessel is currently under attack by 1 skiffs in position 12 56N 048 08E. Red hulled skiff, 6 POB, weapons fired.

------------------------------

02 August 2010

Warning, Pirate Attack, Gulf of Aden

Latitude: 13 02N, Longitude: 048 54E

Alert number 394 / 2010

At 0420 UTC 02 AUG 10 a merchant vessel was hijacked in position 13 02N - 048 54E.

The counter-piracy effort is still mired in legal confusion, resulting in sort of pirate "catch and release" program as reported here:

International maritime laws again prevented authorities from prosecuting pirates captured by Danish warship Esbern Snarre over the weekend in the Aden Gulf.

According to Nato’s maritime command, the warship was summoned by a ship sailing under the Panama flag on Saturday, after it reported attacks by pirates.

When the Esbern Snarre and US carrier Winston Churchill arrived at the scene, the Panama-registered ship and a Norwegian ship were both under attack from Somali pirates. A helicopter sent out by the Esbern Snarre fired warning shots and the pirates fled in their boats towards the Somali coast.

Yet despite finding both knives and ammunition shells on board the pirates’ vessels, defence minister Gitte Lillelund Bech told news bureau Ritzau that there was not enough evidence to prosecute the pirates and that they were released. Bech said that neither the American nor Danish forces actually saw the pirates open fire on the two ships.

Nato forces have had a difficult time bringing pirates in the Arabian Sea to trial due to the often conflicting and complex national and maritime laws.

Clicking on the images may increase their size.

Pirates of the South China Sea: ReCAAP Reports

Info from ReCAAP about an increase in pirate attacks off Palau Mandkai in the South China Sea - six attacks in recent days.

On the 16 and 17 of August, three ships were attacked.
 

 Couple this with another report of seven incidents since June 2010 in the area off Palau Subi Besar and the southern part of the South China Sea is becoming a piracy hot spot.

Most of these incidents are armed robbery or attempted robbery. The pirates are described as being armed with "long knives" and /or guns.

A mid-year review by ReCAAP shows the piracy hot spots  have shifted from the Malacca Strait to the areas noted above (red arrow in larger map) and to the Singapore roadstead (red arrow in inset).

Killer Squid

Man eating giant squid:

Millions of killer giant squid are not only devouring vast amounts of fish they have even started attacking humans.

Two Mexican fishermen were recently dragged from their boats and chewed so badly that their bodies could not be identified even by their own families.

Oh goodie.

Set the squid guard watch.


Update: If they start walking like the snakeheads, I'm moving to higher ground.

Are You Prepared for a Hurricane? Earthquake? Flood?

 Before going on - remember that flooding kills more people during a hurricane than does the wind. In any emergency, Turn Around Don't Drown™.

Plan for 3 to 5 days on your own. It takes that long to mobilize help.

Red Cross guidance - Are You Prepared for a Hurricane?:

Steps you can take to be prepared include:

1. Build a disaster supply kit or check the kit you prepared last year. Include a three-day supply of water and ready-to-eat non-perishable foods. Don’t forget a manual can opener, battery-powered radio, flashlight and extra batteries. Your kit should also have a first aid kit, prescription and non-prescription medications, and copies of important documents. You can also shop the Red Cross store for emergency preparedness kits and supplies.
2. Prepare a personal disaster and evacuation plan. Identify two meeting places—one near your home, and one outside your area in case you can’t return home. Make plans for your pets. Select an out-of-area emergency contact person.
3. Be informed. Know what a hurricane WATCH means. If a hurricane WATCH is issued:
* Listen to weather updates from your battery-powered or hand-cranked radio.
* Bring in outdoor objects such as lawn furniture, hanging plants, bicycles, toys and garden tools. Anchor objects that cannot be brought inside.
* Close all windows and doors.
* Cover windows with storm shutters or pre-cut plywood.
* If time permits, and you live in an identified surge zone, elevate furniture or move it to a higher floor to protect it from flooding.
* Fill your vehicle’s gas tank.
* Check your disaster supply kit to make sure items have not expire

Recommended stuff to have:

At a minimum, have the basic supplies listed below. Keep supplies in an easy-­to­-carry emergency preparedness kit that you can use at home or take with you in case you must evacuate.

* Water—one gallon per person, per day (3­day supply for evacuation, 2­week supply for home)
* Food—non­perishable, easy­to­prepare items (3­day supply for evacuation, 2­week supply for home)
* Flashlight
* Battery­powered or hand­crank radio (NOAA Weather Radio, if possible)
* Extra batteries
* First aid kit
* Medications (7­day supply) and medical items
* Multi­purpose tool
* Sanitation and personal hygiene items
* Copies of personal documents (medication list and pertinent medical information, proof of address, deed/lease to home, passports, birth certificates, insurance policies)

* Cell phone with chargers
* Family and emergency contact information
* Extra cash
* Emergency blanket
* Map(s) of the area

Consider the needs of all family members and add supplies to your kit. Suggested items to help meet additional needs are:

* Medical supplies (hearing aids with extra batteries, glasses, contact lenses, syringes, cane)
* Baby supplies (bottles, formula, baby food, diapers)
* Games and activities for children
* Pet supplies (collar, leash, ID, food, carrier, bowl)
* Two­way radios
* Extra set of car keys and house keys
* Manual can opener

Additional supplies to keep at home or in your kit based on the types of disasters common to your area:

* Whistle
* N95 or surgical masks
* Matches
* Rain gear
* Towels
* Work gloves
* Tools/supplies for securing your home
* Extra clothing, hat and sturdy shoes
* Plastic sheeting
* Duct tape
* Scissors
* Household liquid bleach
* Entertainment items
* Blankets or sleeping bags

See also here.

This may be a good idea Eton COMBOBASECAMP-KIT American Red Cross FR1000 and Uniden GMR1035 Two-way Emergency Handcrank Radio Base Camp Kit:

* A must for any emergency toolkit, the Base Camp Combo package is an AM/FM/WeatherBand Hand Crank Radio, Emergency Flashlight, Cell Phone Charger, Emergency Siren, and GMRS 2-Way Radio with two handheld units in one powerful package.
* With the ARC FR1000 don't get caught in the dark! This self-powered hand-crank radio lets you stay informed, even when the power is out. Tune into AM, FM and weather band frequencies for the most up-to-date information in case of emergency. The Voicelink is more than just a radio-it's a multifunctional wonder.
* The two-way walkie-talkie feature with GMRS technology lets you stay in touch, as does the built-in cell phone charger. You also get a flashlight, a beacon light that can function as an SOS signal, and a siren.
* Power it all with the twist of a crank. You'll be prepared for any emergency, and there's an added benefit - Etón Corporation will contribute $1.50 of the sales price to support the American Red Cross. Plus each radio includes American Red Cross disaster preparedness tips!
* The two Uniden GMR1035 handheld units have 22 Channels (15 GMRS, 7 FRS) with a range of up to 10 Miles as well as a battery strength meter so you don't get stranded without power. Each handheld unit includes 3 x AAA batteries for approx. 20 hours of use.

Got trees? A couple of tools to help move things bigger than yourself:

Fearless Navy Bloggers Took to the Air: Interviews with Seth Cropsey and Bill Roggio

Good guests talking China and Pakistan and more.

You can listen by clicking on Episode 34 Pakistan at the hub and the rise of China. 8/29/2010 on Blog Talk Radio

or

Listen to internet radio with Midrats on Blog Talk Radio

UPDATE: An earlier BTR show on the situation in the Pacific here featuring Michael (Misha) Auslin, Director of Japan Studies and Resident Scholar in Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute. (yes, ignore the COIN thing - that happened at episode 33 along with another discussion of Don't Ask, Don't Tell).

Fearless Navy Bloggers Take to the Air: Episode 34 Pakistan at the hub and the rise of China 8/29/2010 Midrats on Blog Talk Radio

Episode 34 Pakistan at the hub and the rise of China. 8/29/2010 - Midrats | Internet Radio | Blog Talk Radio. 5 pm Eastern U.S.

Where is the world's most interesting neighborhood? From northeast to southwest Asia. That is where we are going to focus on this episode of Midrats.Join us as we weigh in with to experts on the subject.

For the first half hour we will have as our guest Seth Cropsey, Senior Fellow from The Hudson Institute to discuss the rise of China and her growing influence throughout Asia and globally. For the second half of the hour we will have guest Bill Roggio from Long Wars Journal to discuss the central role of Pakistan in this decade and next's global conflict.

"Pakistan Sucks," Says a NY Times Op-Ed and "It's all America's fault."

Yes, well, ignore billions of dollars of U.S. Aid humanitarian aid poured into the sink hole that is Pakistan and in the midst of a flood, blame the Americans for a failing state, and you have an NY Times op-ed piece by Ali Sethi "Pakistan, Drowning in Neglect":

“That is not advisable,” he said. There were soldiers on the highway, and they wouldn’t want to be on camera. What were soldiers doing on the highway?

The answer came in evasive, fragmented sentences: there was an airbase on the Sindhi side of the highway. This was where the military’s newest F-16 fighter jets were parked. But local residents believed that the base also housed the notorious American drones used to kill Islamist militants in the mountains. If true, this meant that the military was getting tens of millions of dollars a year in exchange, none of which trickled down to the local population.
***
But there is at least one other way of looking at the country revealed by this natural disaster. This is a place where peasants drown in rice fields they don’t own, where mud-and-brick villages are submerged to save slightly less expendable towns, and where dying villages stand next to airbases housing the most sophisticated fighter jets in the world. Such a country is owed more than just aid, it is owed nothing less than reparations from all those who preside over its soil.

This includes politicians and bureaucrats, who are already being brought to account by a rambunctious electronic media, but also an unaccountably powerful military and its constant American financiers, who together stand to lose the most when the next wave comes.

How much aid? How about $17 billion dollars from FY 2002 to FY2011.

President Obama authorized $7.9 billion in October 2009.

Was some of this money spent to further U.S. interests?

I sure as hell hope so.

We are, after all, a country and not a charity.

Even with that, which country has hundreds of members of its military engaged in difficult rescue missions? Who will match the following (as of 16 Aug - I'm sure the totals are higher now)?

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16, 2010 – Four U.S. Marine Corps CH-46 Sea Knight helicopters arrived today and U.S. Air Force C-130 cargo aircraft began transporting international aid within Pakistan as part of the continued U.S. humanitarian assistance in support of flood relief from the monsoon floods.

The four helicopters are part of the contingent of 19 helicopters urgently ordered to Pakistan last week by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates. They bring to 11 the total number of U.S. military aircraft in Pakistan.

Meanwhile, two Air Force C-130 aircraft from the 455th Air Expeditionary Wing in Afghanistan flew to the Pakistani air force base Chaklala in Rawalpindi this morning in response to a Pakistani government request to pick up and transport international relief supplies stored there for delivery to flood-stricken areas. These flights are scheduled to continue daily to assist with getting out urgently needed relief supplies. An estimated 52,000 pounds of relief supplies were delivered today to Sukkur for distribution by Pakistani government and military authorities.

To date, the United States has pledged to provide about $76 million in assistance to flood-affected populations in Pakistan. Support includes both financial assistance and the immediate provision of urgently needed supplies and services, drawing on unique U.S. capabilities and resources.

U.S. military helicopters have rescued 3,555 people and transported 436,340 pounds of emergency relief supplies in spite of bad weather. In addition, within 36 hours of the initial flooding on July 29, the United States began delivering thousands of packaged meals to Pakistan from U.S. stocks in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the region. In all, 436,944 meals that conform with Islamic law were provided to civilian and military officials in Pakistan for distribution to Pakistanis in need.

Two shipments of heavy-duty, waterproof plastic sheeting to be used in construction of temporary dry shelter arrived in Karachi over the past two days. The 770 rolls bring the number of sheeting materials rolls brought to Pakistan to 1,870, an amount expected to help in providing shelter for 112,000 people. Some 14,000 blankets were brought along with the sheeting last week.

“Our experience has shown that plastic sheeting is urgently needed for temporary shelters, and we know it is urgently needed in Sindh as the flood waters continue to move south,” said U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne Patterson. “It will be supplied along with locally purchased materials that can be easily moved when people are able to return home.”

The sheeting material will provide dry shelter for 46,800 people in Sindh province. The cargo is immediately being sent to a logistics hub in Sindh and will be distributed by local and international organizations.

Other U.S. contributions to date include:

-- A month’s emergency food rations to more than 307,000 people through a partnership with the World Food Program.

-- About $11.25 million for the United Nations Refugee Agency, $5 million for the International Committee of the Red Cross, $3 million to the World Health Organization and $4.1 million for Save the Children.

-- A total of 436,944 meals delivered to civilian and military officials in Pakistan within 36 hours of the initial flooding via U.S. Air Force airlift, a contribution of about $3.7 million.

-- Emergency relief items totaling about $4 million delivered to the National Disaster Management Authority. The items include: 18 Zodiac rescue boats, six water filtration units, 10 water storage bladders, 30 concrete-cutting saws and 12 pre-fabricated steel bridges. A 25-kilowatt generator was provided to the Frontier Scouts-KPk to support their flood relief efforts.

You want more? Go review this, which includes only the DoD involvement.

Let's turn the question back to the internal politics of Pakistan:
"Why did not Pakistan invest in more flood control instead of nuclear weapons?" After all, floods have happened for years:

Yet, little attention has been focused on why the flood and other natural hazards that have struck Pakistan have done so much damage. Pakistan has suffered from earthquakes, droughts and floods in recent years. In each case, the cost in terms of human life, suffering and material damage has been magnified by the country’s underdeveloped physical and social infrastructure. Previously, floods occurred in 1950, 1970, 1975, 1982, 1992 and 1993, washing away homes, crops, livestock, roads, schools and clinics. Mercifully, the extensive system of dams, embankments and canals—partly built with U.S. foreign assistance in the 1960s—has permitted some management of the downstream water flow, but this system was overwhelmed by the magnitude of the current flood.  (emphasis added)

I guess, though, to follow the popular phrase, "it would have been worse" without that aid from the 1960s. And, it also follows that if the Americans are willing to pay for flood control, that frees up Pakistani money for things like developing nuclear weapons technology.

Oh, wait, there was a disruption in aid to Pakistan?

But actual U.S. development assistance to Pakistan has been minimal since the large aid programs of the 1960s and early 1970s (the hey-day of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship). At that time, U.S. development assistance helped build roads, power stations and a vibrant agricultural economy. Since then, Pakistan has seen little cash for development projects from the United States.

Let's see, the liberal Brooking Institute couldn't bring itself to identify why the aid dropped, but I will (with the help of Wikipedia):

On the surface as well, Carter's diplomatic policies towards Pakistan in particular changed drastically. The administration had cut off financial aid to the country in early 1979 when religious fundamentalists, encouraged by the prevailing Islamist military dictatorship over Pakistan, burnt down a US Embassy based there. The international stake in Pakistan, however, had greatly increased with the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The then-President of Pakistan, General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, was offered 400 million dollars to subsidize the anti-communist Mujahideen in Afghanistan by Carter. General Zia declined the offer as insufficient, famously declaring it to be "peanuts"; and the U.S. was forced to step up aid to Pakistan. (emphasis added)

Of course, there was that "Symington Amendment" thingie:

The Symington Amendment (to the aforementioned Foreign Assistance Act) prohibits delivering or receiving economic assistance and military aid unless the President certifies that Pakistan has not obtained any nuclear-enriched material. The Glenn Amendment requires the termination of U.S. government economic assistance and military transfers due to Pakistan's testing of a nuclear device in 1998 (this applies to India as well). It also prohibits U.S. support for non-Basic Human Needs lending at the International Financial Institutes. The Pressler Amendment calls for sanctions on government to government military sales and new economic assistance unless the President certifies that Pakistan does not possess a nuclear device.

The Symington Amendment was first activated against Pakistan in 1979 because of Pakistan's importation of equipment for the Kahuta uranium-enrichment facility, a facility which is not subject to IAEA safeguards. However, the Soviet invasion of Afghansitan in 1979 led to a shift in U.S. proliferation policies towards Pakistan, and in 1981 Congress waived the Symington Amendment, citing national security concerns.

Until 1990, the United States provided military aid to Pakistan to modernize its conventional defensive capability. During this period the U.S. allocated about 40% of its assistance package to non-reimbursable credits for military purchases, the third largest program behind Israel and Egypt. The remainder of the aid program was devoted to economic assistance.

Soon after the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, in 1990 the Bush I Administration declined to make the certification that Pakistan does "not possess a nuclear explosive device and that the proposed U.S. assistance program will significantly reduce the risk that Pakistan will possess a nuclear explosive device." As a result the Pressler Amendment went into effect against Pakistan, ending all government to government military sales to Pakistan.

Speaking of Pakistan's "friends," how about explaining The Pakistan Taliban has threatened to attack foreign aid workers hampering efforts to get relief to the eight million people affected by the flooding?

In the meantime, forgive my lack of sympathy for the picture painted by Ali Sethi. Some beds you make all on your own.

Pakistan flood map from ReliefWeb. Click on it to enlarge.

Royal Navy: Ships Needed

The "dangerously weak" Royal Navy will put trade routes at risk from pirates and terrorists unless the Government buys more frigates, a think tank has warned.:

It pointed out that 95 per cent of British trade by volume and 90 per cent by value was carried out by sea.

But the Navy's policing role risked being undermined if it did not receive extra funding, they argued. The article added that it would be a "grave failure" if the review "attended principally – or worse, exclusively" to the financial squeeze from the Government and political pressure over Afghanistan.

"No one associates the full supermarket shelves, the availability of a range of other goods and the supply of fuels to power our homes, cars and industry with the free flow of sea trade."

The report said future orders should be "seriously cost-constrained" so ships were more basic and more could be bought. The MoD has said one of its long-term aims will be to use less specialised, cheaper ships that are easier to sell abroad.

One former naval officer notes that most of the work is done by helicopters, anyway. No report how he suggests the helicopters get out to sea to do their work.

So much for Rule Britannia:

Rule, Britannia! Britannia, rule the waves:
Britons never will be slaves.

It is an island, after all.

This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,--
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

William Shakespeare (1564 - 1616), "King Richard II", Act 2 scene 1

Of course, maybe they could work a deal with the Danes. That's a Danish design up at the top.

Littoral Combat Ship: Minimal Manning Factors

Duty Aboard the Littoral Combat Ship: ‘Grueling but Manageable’:

Designed to sail in close-to-shore waters, the 3,000-ton LCS is technologically unlike anything sailors have experienced before. But it remains to be seen whether advanced technology can make up for actual hands on deck.

“When we started this, we knew we had to learn more than one job. We knew we would have to be multi-talented. But I don’t think any of us had any idea how much we were going to have to know and learn and stretch ourselves to be able to get this ship to operate,” says Doyle, who has been with the LCS program since 2005. She served as the crew’s executive officer through Freedom’s build and commissioning process and became commanding officer in March 2009.
***
The crew works in three six-hour shifts. Sailors stand watch at their assigned stations for six hours and then have the next 12 hours off. But the caveat is that the ship conducts many missions that require more sailors than just one shift’s worth of watch standers, Doyle says.
***
Sailors only end up with about six hours of rest a day. “We try not to impinge upon those six hours. But sometimes we have to,” Doyle says. Emergencies, such as fire or flooding, require all hands on deck. Pulling in and out of port also involves the entire crew.

Timmons says he only has four to six hours of sleep every 24 to 48 hours. The work cycle on board is grueling but manageable, he says. He believes that LCS is the future of the Navy.

Most Navy veterans with ship service have done their share of long hours and long days with minimal rest. These were, for the most part, exceptions - not a design plan.

Merchant ships can get away with minimal manning because they don't have all those things to do that distinguish warships from them - like manning a combat info center, operating helicopters and the like.

Now, if you need more people to operate safely, where will you put them?

Another interesting part of this article is this from one of the commanding officers who was interviewed:

“We don’t have big fuel tanks though, so while we’re very efficient, we can’t go far,” says Edwards, who last month took command of Blue Crew and sailed Freedom back to her home port of San Diego.

That's just dandy. Send a squadron of these to sea and you'll need a dedicated logistics train to keep them fueled and fed.
 

Iranians at Sea: Swarm Attacks (revisited)

In light of the Iranian Republican Guard announcement about new, high speed missile firing targets boats, here's what I wrote in September 2007 in Iran's Swarm Attack Tactics in the Strait of Hormuz:

You might have missed this article on Iran's 1000 boat "swarm force" stationed near the Strait of Hormuz...:

The U.S. Navy has determined that Iran has amassed a fleet of fast patrol boats in the 43-kilometer straits. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, responsible for strategic programs, leads the effort.

At this point, officials said, IRGC has deployed more than 1,000 FPBs in and around the straits. The vessels, armed with cruise missiles, mines, torpedoes and rocket-propelled grenades, are up to 23 meters in long and can reach a speed of 100 kilometers per hour. ***
"This marks the implementation of Iran's swarm program, where dozens of armed speed boats attack much larger naval vessels from all sides," an official said.
***
IRGC swarming tactics envision a group of more than 100 speedboats attacking a target, such as a Western naval vessel or a commercial oil tanker. They said 20 or more speedboats would strike from each direction, making defense extremely difficult.
***
"We have devised various tactics and other ways of coping," U.S. commander Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff said. "You just don't get 1,000 or 500 or even 20 of anything under way and tightly orchestrated over a large body of water to create a specific effect at a specific time and specific place. They have their own challenges.''

Wait, they won't just magically appear all around a carrier battle group all at once? Even with their incredible Iranian stealth attack ground effect boat/planes?

More on "swarm" tactics and on the Iranian stealth effort here under the title of "Iran's Doctrine of Asymmetric Naval Warfare" -

Swarming tactics are not new; they have been practiced by land armies for thousands of years. Such tactics require light, mobile forces with substantial striking power, capable of rapidly concentrating to attack an enemy from multiple directions and then rapidly dispersing.

Iranian naval swarming tactics focus on surprising and isolating the enemy’s forces and preventing their reinforcement or resupply, thereby shattering the enemy’s morale and will to fight. Iran has practiced both mass and dispersed swarming tactics. The former employs mass formations of hundreds of lightly armed and agile small boats that set off from different bases, then converge from different directions to attack a target or group of targets. The latter uses a small number of highly agile missile or torpedo attack craft that set off on their own, from geographically dispersed and concealed locations, and then converge to attack a single target or set of targets (such as a tanker convoy). The dispersed swarming tactic is much more difficult to detect and repel because the attacker never operates in mass formations.

During the Iran-Iraq War, the Pasdaran navy used mass swarming tactics; as a result, its forces proved vulnerable to attack by U.S. naval and air power. Because of this, it is unlikely that such tactics would be used for anything but diversionary attacks in the future. In today’s Iranian naval forces, mass swarming tactics have largely given way to dispersed swarming.

Dispersed swarming tactics are most successful when attackers can elude detection through concealment and mobility, employ stand-off firepower, and use superior situational awareness (intelligence), enabling them to find and engage the enemy first. This accounts for a number of trends in Iranian naval force development in the past two decades. The first is the acquisition and development of small, fast weapons platforms—particularly lightly armed small boats and missile-armed fast-attack craft; extended- and long-range shore- and sea-based antiship missiles; midget and diesel attack submarines (for intelligence gathering, covert mine laying, naval special warfare, and conventional combat operations); low-signature reconnaissance and combat unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs); and the adaptation of the Shahab-3 medium-range surface-to-surface missile armed with a cluster warhead reportedly carrying 1,400 bomblets, for use against enemy naval bases and carrier battle groups.

Iran has also sought to improve its ability to achieve surprise by employing low-observable technologies (such as radar-absorbent paints), strict communications discipline, stringent emissions control measures, passively or autonomously guided weapons systems (such as the Kowsar series of television-guided antiship missiles), and sophisticated command-and-control arrangements. To support its naval swarm tactics, Iran has encouraged decentralized decisionmaking and initiative, as well as autonomy and self-sufficiency among naval combat elements.

Dispersed swarming? Adm Cosgrove has it right - a coordinated attack is difficult to conceal and an uncoordinated attack can lead to forces being defeated seriatim.

For some thoughts on the effectiveness of other "super" weapons, Galrahn has a good post here.

Picture of captured Iranian Boghammer boat in San Diego Harbor from here as is the Iranian Boghammer action photo which bears the following caption on the Warboats site:

Iranian Boghammer from "Operation Earnst Will." Note on the bow the box is 107mm rocket launchers and also carried 51 cal on stern, plus RPGs & SAAM missles.

UPDATE: Map of Strait of Hormuz liberated from someplace else. It purports to show Silkworm missile ranges in the area.

To reiterate, it's really hard to hide 20 or 30 or 100 boats getting underway and trying to sneak around in an area like the Persian/Arabian Gulf. Faster boats don't add much to the picture - except they make faster fireballs flaming across the water.

However, there is some interesting discussion of "swarming tactics" at the Canadian Naval Review that points out a few successes in special circumstances (HMS Cornwall was in a maneuver bind when the IRGC went after her small boat crews, for example, or the famous "victory" by a swarm brought by a U.S. Marine general in a training exercise). By the way, "victories" like that are why we do training exercises in the first place.

 UPDATE: More here:

The Iranians used small speedboats extensively within the Gulf and the Strait throughout the 1980s Tanker War with Iraq, inflicting damage on vessels with rocket-propelled grenades (RPG) and machine guns. During the War, Iran often used the boats in shallower, coastal waters, where the boats could swiftly attack and then hide among the "multitude of islands, islets and coral reefs."  Iran also used small boats to lay mines with a small, crude onboard crane.

Tactically, Iran commonly tried "mass swarming tactics" to attack using large numbers of small boats simultaneously.  The largest of these attacks allegedly involved over forty individual boats. These "mass swarm" attacks proved extremely vulnerable to U.S. air power during the Tanker War.  This susceptibility may be one of the major factors causing the IRGC to retreat from a planned attack on Kuwaiti oil infrastructure in October 1987 in the face of a Saudi/U.S. show of air and sea strength. footnotes omitted)

ANOTHER UPDATE: Phil Ewing of the Navy Times "The Scoop Deck" captures the essence of the Iranian claims with his posts Iran’s massive armada ("That means that Iran has the largest navy in history by an enormous margin — so many combat vessels that you could walk their decks from Bandar Abbas to Doha without getting your feet wet.") and Swarm Warning ("Action movie directors are encouraged to make a summer blockbuster that includes Marine Corps AH-1W Super Cobras defending a Navy strike group against a small-boat swarm attack. Because that would be epic.").

Troubled am I. Not.

However, if Hollywood needs script advice and a handsome old guy to play the tough but kindly American admiral . . . my email address is over on the right.