Fake Out -Lying Somali Pirates: "Hostage crew tries to take back their ship" -Not

Reported here:

Crewmen on an arms-laden Ukrainian cargo ship hijacked 10 weeks ago tried to overpower their Somali captors, the pirates said Tuesday, as international efforts to stem piracy intensified.

"Some crew members on the Ukrainian ship are misbehaving. They tried to harm two of our gunmen late Monday," said a spokesman for the pirates aboard the MV Faina, held off the coast of Somalia since it was hijacked on September 25.

"This is unacceptable, they risk serious punitive measures. Somalis know how to live and how to die at the same time, but the Ukrainians' attempt to take violent action is misguided," said the spokesman, who declined to give his name.

Time for the message to the pirates: "All crewmen alive or all pirates dead!"

UPDATE: As Tom notes in the comments, it's a bogus tale:

"In reality, the following happened: Yesterday evening, two pirates who headed for the shore on a boat were seized and detained by the Americans. The pirates called intermediaries and the ship owner and asked them to speak to the Americans to ask for the release of their seized accomplices, but were told it is impossible," Mikhail Voitenko from Sovfracht Maritime Bulletin said.

"So the pirates launched the canard about a mutiny. Something like a threat," Voitenko told Ukraine's Unian news agency, citing the Faina's owner.

Gosh, if you can't trust pirates, who can you trust?

Headline updated

Max Boot on "Pirates, Terrorism and Failed States"

Max Boot opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal on Pirates, Terrorism and Failed States:

Until we are willing to place more ungoverned spaces under international administration, evils such as piracy and terrorism will continue to flourish.

So say we all of us.

Oh, and in case you were wondering, it is all the fault of the USA according to that unbiased outfit, Human Rights Watch.

USNI Blog

Can't get enough of Navy, Coast Guard, Marine and other maritime stuff? The United States Naval Institute, "the Nation’s premier independent forum for critical thinking on issues of national defense" now offers up the USNI Blog. The gang of "guest bloggers" includes Admiral Jim Stavridis, Commander of SouthCom and Admiral Thad Allen, Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard plus some bloggers who also may be familiar to you.

Monday Reading

Fred Fry's Maritime Monday 139 with a look at the Port of Houston and much more.

CDR Salamander and the LCS ASW Module. Like it he does not.

Greyhawk on the choice of General Shinseki to head the VA. Bullet proof.

Maggie needs her mind washed out with soap.

Jane finds that the Yemeni president seems to have a strong fantasy life.

Piracy continues to move down the east African coast

A Dutch container ship outruns some would be pirates off the coast of Tanzania (that's the country below Kenya on the African east coast), as reported here:

A high seas chase in which a container ship outran pirates shows the hijackers are extending their reach further out from Somalia, mariners say.
***
"Earlier attacks were on ships off the coast of Somalia, then off the coast of Kenya and now this was 450 nautical miles off Dar es Salaam," Noel Choong of the International Maritime Bureau told [CNN]...

You know, there's lot of money in this and it is easy to imagine some additional pirate "safe havens" being established away from Somalia proper...

Circle on map indicates general area of concern.

UPDATE: More here:

But the pirates have already moved the goalposts in the game of high-seas tag with warships deployed to protect shipping, and have gradually turned their gunsights on targets outside Somalia's waters.

"The problem is that the pirates are no longer just attacking ships off the Somalian coast but are going further east and south where there is no naval protection," Noel Choong, head of the International Maritime Bureau piracy reporting centre in Kuala Lumpur told AFP.

"Previously the pirates were attacking off southern Somalia but now you are seeing attacks 400 to 500 miles from the Kenyan coast, where they are targeting ships, and they are going even as far off to Tanzania, which is further south."
***
The IMB said the ship's captain noticed a white-hulled fishing boat believed to be the pirates' mother ship near the scene of the attack.

"So it is clear that the pirates are expanding their base of operations and operational area," Choong told AFP on Monday, adding that the pirates are becoming bolder and more dangerous.

"We find it very disturbing that they are going so far out of their operational area, encroaching in waters at least two countries away."

"The fact that they can attack 450 nautical miles east of Dar Es Salaam is very worrying."

"Somalia's piracy problem is everyone's problem"

Commentary by Claude Berube, Naval Academy professor, on the Christian Science Monitor site: Somalia's piracy problem is everyone's problem:

The issue is not whether piracy is tied to terrorism, but rather how terrorists or others might employ piratical tactics. If nonstate actors find the tactic is sound and the defense against it untenable, then it will be used to conduct similar or more spectacular operations. How would nonstate actors or other future belligerents interpret any success by the pirates? Absent an effective response to lawlessness, Somali piracy may be a prism to view potential copycat killers.

Somali Pirates: System Explained

StrategyPage ofers up an explanation of how the Somali pirates operate and are sutained in Somali Pirates And Their Aggressive Agents:

Of late, the negotiations have taken about two months, and a ransom of one or two million is usually paid. This tends to be delivered, in cash, usually via a well armed tugboat coming north from Kenya (where ports like Mombassa have banks that can supply the required amount of currency, usually, per the pirates request, in used, but recent, $50 and $100 notes). The armed cash escorts bring the money to the ship, the pirates haul it ($2 million in hundreds weighs less than 30 pounds) aboard, count it, then leave with their loot. At that point, some of the armed escorts stay with the ship as the crew fires up its engines and gets them away from Somalia.

Somali Pirates: EU Arrives, NATO Leaves

Six ships and some Maritime Patrol Aircraft are joining the dozen or so warships already attempting to defend the sea lines of communication in the Gulf of Aden and off Somalia, as reported here:

Six EU warships and three maritime reconnaissance aircraft will patrol the region and escort cargo ships carrying relief aid through pirate-infested waters to Somalia, as the NATO vessels have done since the end of October. The NATO ships will return to Europe.

In addition to the alliance's ships, about a dozen other warships from the United States, India, Russia and Malaysia are patrolling the region.

UPDATE: A report that a risk averse cruise line is flying passengers around the piracy area and sending empty cruise ships through, as reported here:

Now I just received a note via email from my mother on the MS. Columbus, that the ship is being evacuated to prevent any possible encounter with the pirates. I guess the attempted attack on a cruise ship last weekend concerned the German cruise line. They are unloading all passengers in Hodeidah, Yemen and will fly them to Dubai, where they will spend 3 days in a Hotel. Then they will fly to Salala, Oman and continue their journey on the MS. Columbus. The Captain is facing the potential pirate encounter with a selected crew of 50. Hopefully he will be able to outrun the pirates as well!

Sunday Ship History: 12-7-41

Somewhere in the miles between Tacoma and Hawaii, a steam ship plods through the ocean. Thirty-five souls are aboard in transit between one place and another. The ship's superstructure is white, her hull dark. She carries the name SS Cynthia Olson. Built in 1918, once named Coquina. She's now part of the Olson Shipping line out of San Francisco. A "steam schooner" they call her - all 250 feet of her. She's got a load of Army supplies and a thousand miles to to go to reach Diamond Head.

Two of the men aboard are in the Army, the rest are merchant sailors, some are veterans of a hundred sea trips, others newer to world of big oceans and little ships. Men on watch, men eating, men sleeping or reading or dreaming. A sailor smokes a cigarette. Another ties his boots. Casual chatter among the bridge watch and the engineers down below watch gauges and spin valves, adding or releasing steam, oil, water.

Out there at sea the ship is not alone. Unknown to the Captain or the crew, they have an unexpected companion. Suddenly a shadow rises from the depths and begins to attack them using a deck gun. The ship's crew radios for help, describing the gunfire from the submarine that suddenly appeared beside them at sea. The radio signal is weak and then gone - the message it carried is shocking - an unprovoked submarine attack on a merchant ship at sea.

But that shocking message is soon lost in the greater news of a much larger surprise attack. After all, what is an attack on a small merchant ship compared to the attack on the great naval fleet lying smashed at a Navy base that everyone now knows the name of - Pearl Harbor.

SS Cynthia Olson is sunk at sea with all hands and two passengers. Her master, Berthel Carlsen, goes down with the ship. As battleships lie broken and burning, SS Cynthia Olson is a very brief footnote in history except to the families and friends of her crew. She's the first U.S. merchant ship sunk by the Japanese in World War II. Sunk because she stumbled into the path of a Japanese submarine on December 7, 1941.

So, when you pause to remember the Pearl Harbor attack on this day, its 67th anniversary, add to your thoughts and prayers the 35 men killed at sea on a merchant ship, carrying goods from Tacoma to Hawaii, that met the Japanese submarine I-26 1000 miles northeast of Diamond Head on Pearl Harbor Day.

Remember all who died on 12-7-41.


More.

Somali Pirates: WaPo writes a yarn

Like some candy bars, this WaPo piece, A New Generation of Pirates Is Definitely Making Waves, is like a candy bar in which the good bits are surrounded by lots of fluff:

It's far too early for any Somali pirate's version of a Free Prince speech to be creditable. He's robbing us. For the time being, then, a Somali pirate is a thug and a kidnapper whose trade happens to share the same name as that of the great Bartholomew, the mad Blackbeard, the courtly Morgan, the misunderstood Kidd, the eloquent Bellamy.

But just look at pictures of the Somali pirates. Their blunt fashion is ragged pants and T-shirts. They wear bandannas to cover their faces, or sometimes just the top of their heads. They wear sunglasses.

Pirate chic? What next? Convenience store robber chic? Imagine-

But just look at pictures of the convenience store stick up men. Their blunt fashion is ragged pants and T-shirts, hoodies and ball caps or they wear bandannas to cover their faces, or sometimes just the top of their heads. They wear sunglasses.

They poke a finger in the eye of the "man" as they ply their dangerous trade...

UPDATE: gCaptain has a link to a BBC audio on pirates, some of whom are nice to their mothers, apparently.

"Piracy Is Terrorism"

The author of a book on old pirates states Piracy Is Terrorism, and proceeds to note that the problem with fighting them is the law:

And yet the world’s legal apparatus is woefully confused as to how to respond to piracy. Are the Somali pirates ordinary criminals, or a quasi-military force?
***
Pirates are not ordinary criminals. They are not enemy combatants. They are a hybrid, recognized as such for thousands of years, and can be seized at will by anyone, at any time, anywhere they are found.
***
Recognizing piracy as an international crime will do something else: It will give individual states that don’t want to prosecute pirates an alternative — the international court. If pirates are recognized under their traditional international legal status — as neither ordinary criminals nor combatants, but enemies of the human race — states will have a much freer hand in capturing them. If piracy falls within the jurisdiction of the international court, states will not need to shoulder the burden of prosecution alone.

Today the world’s navies are hamstrung by conflicting laws and the absence of an international code. A comprehensive legal framework is the only way to break the stalemate off Somalia. In a trial before the Old Bailey in 1696, Dr. Henry Newton, the Admiralty advocate, declared, “Suffer pirates and the commerce of the world must cease.

I feel like this has been covered before.

Law of Sea Saves Pirates

Seven lucky pirates were rescued by a Danish warship after the pirates spent several days adrift in the Gulf of Aden because the Danes complied with international law. As reported here:

“Under international law, ships are obligated to help people who are distressed at sea,” the navy said. “Because the people on board couldn’t be directly connected with a criminal act, they were treated only as distressed.”
***
“Because of the weather in the area, it wasn’t possible to tow the distressed vessel,” the navy said. “For the safety of sea transport in the area, the vessel was therefore destroyed.”

The alleged pirate vessel had been adrift in Yemen waters, and the crew has now been turned over to Yemeni authorities, the navy said. The Absalon’s crew confiscated the weapons found on board.

The weapons included anti-tank rockets and machine guns, according to broadcaster TV2. The pirates had been adrift at sea for seven days, the last three days without food or water, TV2 said.

Worth a listen: Behind The Terror: The Role Of Organized Crime

Heard most of this on the way home from a long, hard, day. I thought it was interesting enough to post a link for you, so go to Behind The Terror: The Role Of Organized Crime : NPR and listen.

Somali Pirates: UN extends right for foreign navies to pursue in Somali waters

Reported as Countries can enter Somali waters to fight piracy: UN:

The UN Security Council has passed a resolution permitting member countries to enter the territorial waters of Somalia to fight piracy.

The US-sponsored resolution, passed unanimously by the Security Council Tuesday, is valid for 12 months. It welcomes the recent initiatives taken by countries like India, Canada, France, Russia, Britain and the US to counter piracy off Somali coast.

The Security Council resolution is expected to come as a big help to countries like India that are fighting Somali pirates. Under international laws, naval ships are free to patrol international waters.
***
In its resolution, the Security Council called for "seizure and disposition of boats, vessels, arms and other related equipment" used or suspected of being used for piracy.

Actual Resolution is available here in pdf format:

6. Welcomes initiatives by Canada, Denmark, France, India, the
Netherlands, the Russian Federation, Spain, the United Kingdom, the United States
of America, and by regional and international organizations to counter piracy off the
coast of Somalia pursuant to resolutions 1814 (2008), 1816 (2008) and 1838 (2008),
the decision by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to counter piracy off
the Somalia coast, including by escorting vessels of the WFP, and in particular the
decision by the EU on 10 November 2008 to launch, for a period of 12 months from
December 2008, a naval operation to protect WFP maritime convoys bringing
humanitarian assistance to Somalia and other vulnerable ships, and to repress acts of
piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia
***
9. Calls upon States and regional organizations that have the capacity to do
so, to take part actively in the fight against piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia, in particular, consistent with this resolution and relevant
international law, by deploying naval vessels and military aircraft, and through
seizure and disposition of boats, vessels, arms and other related equipment used in
the commission of piracy and armed robbery off the coast of Somalia, or for which
there is reasonable ground for suspecting such use;
***
10. Decides that for a period of 12 months from the date of this resolution
States and regional organizations cooperating with the TFG in the fight against
piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia, for which advance
notification has been provided by the TFG to the Secretary-General, may:
(a) Enter into the territorial waters of Somalia for the purpose of repressing
acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea, in a manner consistent with such action
permitted on the high seas with respect to piracy under relevant international
law; and
(b) Use, within the territorial waters of Somalia, in a manner consistent with
such action permitted on the high seas with respect to piracy under relevant
international law, all necessary means to repress acts of piracy and armed robbery
at sea;
11. Affirms that the authorizations provided in this resolution apply only with
respect to the situation in Somalia and shall not affect the rights or obligations or
responsibilities of Member States under international law, including any rights or
obligations under the Convention, with respect to any other situation, and
underscores in particular that this resolution shall not be considered as establishing customary international law; and affirms further that such authorizations have been provided only following the receipt of the 20 November letter conveying the consent of the TFG

Part of the effort is to preserve Somali sovereign rights. Unanswered is the question of what to do with the pirates if captured. Current law applicable to the "high seas" is UN Convention of the Law of the Sea, Part VII, :

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.

What about pirates taken in Somali waters, which, by definition are waters "in the jurisdiction of a state," failed or not? The UN boots that over to a committee:

15. Notes that the 1988 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Maritime Navigation (“SUA Convention”) provides for parties to create criminal offences, establish jurisdiction, and accept delivery of persons responsible for or suspected of seizing or exercising control over a ship by force or threat thereof or any other form of intimidation; urges States parties to the SUA Convention to fully implement their obligations under said Convention and cooperate with the Secretary-General and the IMO to build judicial capacity for the successful prosecution of persons suspected of piracy and armed robbery at sea off the coast of Somalia;

So the ball now is in the court of the parties to the SUA Convention to figure out the troubling legal framework with which to deal with these pirates. You can read the SUA Convention here. The SUA Convention sprang out of the hijacking of the cruise ship Achille Lauro:

According to the provisions of the Convention, any person commits an offense if that person unlawfully and intentionally commits, attempts to commit, threatens to commit, or abets the seizure or exercise of control over a ship by force or threat of force or any form of intimidation; or commits any of the following acts if it endangers or is likely to endanger the safe navigation of that ship: an act of violence against a person on board; destroying a ship or damaging a ship or its cargo; placing or causing to be placed on a ship a device or substance likely to destroy the ship or cause damage to the ship or its cargo; destroying or seriously damaging maritime navigational facilities or seriously interfering with their operation; or communicating information he knows to be false. It is also an offense to injure or kill any person in connection with the commission or attempted commission of any of the previous offenses.

The Convention applies if the ship is navigating or is scheduled to navigate into, through, or from waters beyond the outer limit of the territorial sea of a single State, or the lateral limits of its territorial sea with adjacent States. In all other cases, the Convention also applies when the offender or alleged offender is found in the territory of a State Party other than the State in whose waters the offence occurred

***
Measures to establish jurisdiction over the offenses shall be taken when the offense is committed against or on board a ship flying the flag of the State at the Inventory of International Nonproliferation Organizations and Regimes time the offense is committed; in the territory of that State, including its territorial sea; by a national of that State; by a stateless person whose habitual residence is in that State; in an attempt to compel that State to do or abstain from doing any act; or when a national of that State is seized, threatened, injured, or killed during the commission of the offense.

Compliance and Enforcement: Once jurisdiction has been established, States shall take the offender into custody and immediately make a preliminary inquiry into the facts. States Parties are required to either extradite the offender in custody or submit the case for prosecution. States Parties are also required to assist each other in connection with criminal pro-ceedings brought under the Convention. States Parties are also to cooperate in the prevention of offenses by taking all practicable measures to prevent preparations in their respective territories for the commission of those offenses within or outside their territories and by exchanging information in accordance with their national laws.

Clear?

Galrahn in this post links to the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard's blog, in which Admiral Allen writes:

SUA applies to nearly all of the attacks occurring in the Gulf of Aden, and obliges State Parties to criminalize such acts and establish jurisdiction when the offense is committed against their vessels or nationals. SUA establishes a framework whereby masters of ships may deliver suspected SUA offenders to a coastal State Party and the coastal State Party is obliged to accept custody and extradite or prosecute unless it can articulate why the Convention is not applicable. Leveraging States SUA obligations in conjunction with existing international law against piracy provides an effective legal framework to deliver an "endgame." We have worked for several months now with our partners on the Joint Staff, through the "interagency process", and with our international partners to pursue this outcome.

Clearer?

UPDATE: Daniel Sekulich, author and journalist, who blogs at Modern Pirate Tales suggests in the comments that the headline of this post is inaccurate.

I agree - the headline is a slightly misleading.

Daniel also is correct in his reading of the latest UN Resolution, as para 10 of the resolution does provide for the sovereign right of the TFG to give approval to the forces that may enter Somali waters by naming them to the Secretary General.

Just a couple of weeks ago the Indian Navy got such permission as set out here.

I was captured by the intent of the Resolution, rather than its substance and thereby made a mistake.

Daniel's comment did set me to thinking about the matter, though, as did his post setting out the problems created by the Somali pirate situation.

Suppose the Navy of Nowhereistan enters into Somali waters and grabs pirates for trial or even strings them up from their yardarms- what is the TFG or the UN going to do about it? Send a strong letter of protest? Or ratify the intrusion after the fact?

The TFG can't patrol its own waters against foreign fishing poachers, waste dumpers or sea robbers and apparently can't find a force ashore to go after the pirate shore bases or the pirate's leadership and financiers ashore.

It can't even be counted on to provide a court system by which captured pirates may be tried.

Continuing the illusion that Somalia is a real nation with sovereign rights may work to keep international law working, but I can't help but believe that the area would be better off if the UN declared, with or without TFG approval, that the UN was taking over the law enforcement role for Somali waters and littorals, and put the dithering NATO, EU and other navies - including private contractors - to work cleaning up the mess that the absence of the rule of law has created. Sort of protectorate for the Somali EEZ, territorial waters and the adjacent shores, as I have suggested before. Set up a court system at sea if need be.

If the UN wants to hire some of the pirates who claim to be acting as the Somali Coast Guard to be an interim Coast Guard, so much the better. Paint an orange stripe on their boats and give them arrest powers with a court that can impose penalties under the rule of law.

When the Somalis are ready to govern their own waters, the protectorate can end.

Stratfor: Mumbai attack parallels failed New York attack plan

Stratfor posts an interesting comparison between the Mumbai attack of last week with a failed plan to attack New York City several years ago in From the New York Landmarks Plot to the Mumbai Attack. From the last piece by and :

A third similarity exists in the geography of the two cities. In both plots, the use of watercraft is a distinctive tactical similarity. Watercraft gave militants access at unconventional locations where security would be more lax. Both Mumbai (a peninsula) and Manhattan (an island) offer plenty of points where militants can mount assaults from watercraft. Such an attack would not have worked in New Delhi or Bangalore; these are landlocked cities where militants would have had to enter by road, a route much more likely to encounter police patrols. Being centers of trade and surrounded by water, both Mumbai and New York have high levels of maritime traffic. This means infiltrating the area from the water would raise minimal suspicions, especially if the craft were registered locally (as was the case in the Mumbai attack). Such out-of-the box tactics take advantage of security services, which often tend to focus on established threats.
***
Ultimately, the biggest difference between the Landmarks plot and the Mumbai attack is that the Mumbai attack succeeded. The failure of the Landmarks plot probably provided key lessons to the planners of the Mumbai attack, who were able to carry out the stages of the attack without detection and with the full element of surprise. Gauging by the success of the Mumbai incident, we can expect similar strategies and tactics in future attacks.

www.stratfor.com

Note that the U.S. Coast Guard has an on-going concern over the threats potentially posed by terrorists using recreational or other small boats as a mode of delivering themselves or weapons. See here for a look at the DHS "Small Vessel Security Strategy" and here to view in pdf format the Strategy itself.

It's a challenging environment.

UPDATE: More thoughts from James Jay Carafano, Ph.D. at the Heritage Foundation:

The use of light craft to launch the assault has reenergized discussion about similar threats to the United States. The assault "underscores the importance of what we're doing at our ports in terms of security," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff declared, as reported in the Federal Times, "It reminds us that this is an attack vector we have to worry about."

The small-boat threat needs to be addressed, but rather than focusing on this particular terrorist tactic, Congress and the Administration should invest in improving the overall security of the maritime domain. Efforts should be expanded to improve U.S. situational awareness and law enforcement response rather than fixating on specific attack scenarios involving small boats or other terrorist threats. Additionally, any initiatives taken to specifically address the small-boat threat should address all the nation's maritime domain priorities.

Congress seems too busy bailing corporations out to worry much about funding for maritime security...

Somali Pirates: Bigger, Bolder and Thwarted by NATO ship

Five merchant ships under attack by a dozen or so pirate small boats got help from an Italian warship and her helicopter and the intervention ended the attack. As reported here:

Alerted by a distress call, the Italian navy destroyer put itself between the ships and a group of pirate "fast boats", with all vessels using water hoses to repel the pirates.

The Italian warship, Luigi Durand de la Penne, also used its helicopter against the pirates, dispersing their attack, a NATO official said.

"This is probably the biggest multiple, coordinated attack we've seen," the official said, adding that more than 12 pirate boats were involved, perhaps as many as 20.

Swarming attacks? Where have we heard that before? Oh, yes, here, in an Iranian threat.

This could be a nasty turn in the piracy war.

Happy Birthday to the Naval Armed Guard

Dec 2 is the anniversary of the first Naval Armed Guards reporting for duty to a merchant ship to act as a counterbalance to the submarines of World War II:

The first Naval armed guard detachment (seven men under a coxswain) of World War II reports to liberty ship SS Dunboyne.

Their purpose was well set out in Antisubmarine Warfare ONI Publication No. 9:

The submarine had no value as a war machine until the invention of the periscope. By the use of the periscope, partial invisibility was obtained in delivering the attack, thus giving the submarine the power of "ambush," or of making the surprise attack. The surprise attack is the reason for the submarine's existence, for without it, the submarine degenerates into slow moving torpedo boat with all its limitations.

Thus, to combat the submarine, if we prevent it from delivering this surprise, we destroy its effectiveness. In the protection of merchantmen, it should be our aim to prevent the surprise, for it is known that if the submarine once located, by maneuvering, we have a fair chance of escaping the danger of being torpedoed.

By arming merchantmen, we keep the submarine submerged, thus confining it to low speeds of small radius and preventing it from using its guns as a surface vessel.

Though the publication dates from WWI, the idea was revived for the second World War.

Much more about these Navy gunners who served on merchant hull here. And a complete Navy history here titled: Office of Naval Operations History of the Naval Armed Guard Afloat
World War II from which pages comes a tale of the first sinking of a German surface ship in a surface action. When the Germans used surface raider ships disguised as merchant men to attack Allied shipping:

The Stephen Hopkins fought one of the most gallant actions in World War II against two German raiders on September 27 about midway between Capetown and Rio de Janeiro. The vessel was proceeding on a northwesterly course at about 0935. The weather was hazy. From the north two armed raiders appeared on her starboard bow. The larger, a 7,000 ton motor ship, was a mother ship and apparently unarmed forward. The smaller, a 4,000 ton motor ship was heavily armed probably with six 5.9" guns. She was probably No. 23. The Hopkins had a 4" gun aft, two 37 mm guns forward, four .50 cal. and two .30 cal. machine guns.

Upon sighting the raiders, the Hopkins turned away to port. The larger raider immediately drew ahead. At about 1,000 yards the smaller raider opened salvo fire. Throughout the action the larger raider strafed the decks of the Hopkins with machine gun fire. Ensign Kenneth M. Willett, USNR came out on deck as the first shell struck. He was seriously wounded immediately in the stomach by shrapnel from the bursting shell. Nevertheless he continued to direct the firing of the 4" gun at the heavier armed raider until the magazine blew up. Most of the 35 projectiles struck the raider along the water line. The Cadet fired the five remaining four inch shells at the other raider. Meanwhile the machine guns from the Hopkins were sweeping the decks of the raiders and the second mate was directing the fire of the two 37 mm guns forward at the larger ship until his shell handlers were killed and the gun platform wrecked. At the end of 20 minutes the Stephen Hopkins was done for and the order was given to abandon ship. When last seen the Armed Guard officer was covered with blood but was helping cut loose the life rafts. For his action he was awarded the Navy Cross posthumously. The remaining Armed Guards were commended by the Secretary of the Navy. Only five, all wounded, survived the sinking. In addition the destroyer escort No. 354 was named for Ensign Willett. The Stephen Hopkins was awarded the Gallant Ship Citation by the War Shipping Administration.

More here, including the identity of the "Cadet" from the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy who did his duty:

On 18 September, the Stephen Hopkins (Paul Buck, Captain) sailed from Cape Town, South Africa, to Paramaribo, Dutch Guiana. Several days out of Cape Town, the radio operator received a message warning of German raiders. On the morning of the 27th a lookout spotted two ships in the haze flying signal flags. They were in reality the 5,000-ton raider Stier and the 7,800-ton Tannenfels. Both immediately began firing on the Liberty ship, and what ensued was one of the most remarkable surface engagements of the war. Captain Buck immediately turned the Hopkins stern to the raiders. The armed guards manned the four-inch stern gun to defend the ship. The gun crew fired as rapidly as possible on the smaller raider. Fire from the Stier killed the gun crew one by one and volunteers replaced those who had fallen. At the same time, the Tannenfels remained at a distance, raking the Hopkins with machine gun fire that was returned by the Hopkins. The Stier had a fire control system that enabled her to fire salvos and hit the Liberty ship repeatedly. One shell hit one of the main boilers, reducing the speed of the Stephen Hopkins to one knot. Shells struck the Hopkins near the waterline, and incendiary shells eventually set fire to the main deckhouse as the ship slowly sank. The Stier, however, had paid for attacking the Stephen Hopkins. The Hopkins crew had repeatedly struck the smaller raider, now in flames and in a sinking condition. After about twenty minutes of fierce firing, the master sounded the ship’s whistle to abandon ship. In one last act of defiance, Cadet Midshipman Edwin O’Hara fired the last five remaining shells from the four-inch gun, and all struck the Stier. A salvo aimed at the gun killed O’Hara after he had fired the last round. The able-bodied men helped place the wounded in the only undamaged lifeboat. This boat searched for two hours picking up survivors. The ship’s complement originally consisted of eight officers, thirty-three men, and fifteen armed guards but only nineteen men cleared the ship. Only fifteen of these men survived – gunners, one officer and nine men. After a thirty-one day trip they made landfall at a small fishing village on the coast of Brazil.

And a note about a modern version of the Armed Guard here. It should also be remembered that the Naval Armed Guard also served in World War I.

Law screws up pirate fighting

As set out in Legal flaws hinder piracy fight, warn lawyers:

Flaws in anti-piracy laws and their enforcement are hampering the fight against ship hijacks that have claimed 40 vessels off the Somali coast this year, maritime lawyers and officials have warned.

The complex blend of international agreements and domestic rules governing piracy has triggered disagreements about when and how other ships can intervene and what to do with suspects once arrested.

You know, I think I've heard that before somewhere...

Monday Reading

Fred Fry's Maritime Monday 138 is up at gCaptain.com, with a look at Lauritzen Lines ships and enough other stuff to make you put off Monday's work until Tuesday.

CDR Salamander puts up Sid's Christmas booklist. Lots of suggestions in the comments, and you could add your own.

Lex puts a literary reference to work. Oysters.

CGBlog takes note of the "icebreaker gap." Funding...

Somali Pirates: Cruise ship hijacking attempt thwarted

As reported in International force stops pirates hijacking cruise ship:

International coalition warships stopped Somali pirates from hijacking a luxury cruise ship in the Gulf of Aden at the weekend, the Danish navy said Monday.

A Danish navy spokesman refused to name the vessel involved but a Danish media report said the cruise ship Nautica, carrying 400 passengers and 200 crew was the target of the latest attack by Somali pirates.

"The (Danish) navy's tactical command on Sunday led a military operation, dispatching a vessel from the coalition to the aid of a civilian ship threatened by pirates, thereby preventing an act of piracy," Danish navy spokesman Jesper Lynge told AFP.

Lynge said it was up to the countries involved to give details of the cruise ship involved.

According to Danish TV2 News, six to eight armed pirates on two speed boats were observed speeding toward the Nautica, a cruiseliner that had departed from Florida and was carrying 400 passengers and 200 crew.

A French navy warship, alerted by the Danish Navy, scrambled a helicopter to the scene, which sent the pirates fleeing, TV2 News said.

Photo is of MV Nautica.

UPDATE: According to its bridge webcam site here, Nautica is supposed have passed through the Red Sea and to be enroute to the Arabian Sea.