Another Somali attack but with a positive ending... thoughts?

[labatt]

I can't find any details on the yacht Capricorn (sail or motor vessel), but it was attacked 580nm off the coast of Somalia yesterday. The couple onboard had hired a security firm to shadow them. When attacked, the couple locked themselves in a "safe room", the security firm moved in, and after a short time and a short gun battle, the pirates left. I'm guessing it was a pretty expensive vessel if they had a safe room and a security firm shadowing them.

The thing that gets me, though, is that they were 580nm from Somalia. Here's an interesting page that visually shows on a map where the latest attacks have taken place.

This is getting ridiculous. I was listening to NPR yesterday and they were discussing piracy. I was unaware of all of the international law issues preventing countries from going after what we term pirates. They term themselves as the "Coast Guard", and because the government in Somalia is only a provisional one, it is unclear as to how far from their shores they claim territorial rights.

There's an interesting Wikipedia article on Somali Piracy, including a list of ships that are trying to combat it in the area... Piracy in Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another recent and interesting article on piracy is here.. FT.com / Comment / Analysis - Shipping: Boarders to control

Something has to be done, but what? Increases in armed attacks against pirates will probably result in the deaths of many of the current 600+ hostages. There is only a provisional government in Somalia that has said they don't have the resources to combat the threat. The whole situation is crazy.

[ArcherBowman]

Q Ships disguised as yachts and merchantmen, full of marines armed to the teeth.

Sink their vessels, hang them, and burn their nests ashore.

Pay no ransoms. If you pay for something, you get more of it.

[sailingdog]

Typically, the internationally recognized standard for territorial waters is 12 NM...after that point you're generally considered to be in international waters. Some countries have a 200 Nm limit, in which they consider the waters to be in their economic zone but technically not their territory, like the US does.

As for the Somalian Coast Guard... BUSHWAH....IMHO, 580 nm from their shores, attacking or boarding a boat is an ACT OF WAR...

Originally Posted by labatt

I can't find any details on the yacht Capricorn (sail or motor vessel), but it was attacked 580nm off the coast of Somalia yesterday. The couple onboard had hired a security firm to shadow them. When attacked, the couple locked themselves in a "safe room", the security firm moved in, and after a short time and a short gun battle, the pirates left. I'm guessing it was a pretty expensive vessel if they had a safe room and a security firm shadowing them.

The thing that gets me, though, is that they were 580nm from Somalia. Here's an interesting page that visually shows on a map where the latest attacks have taken place.

This is getting ridiculous. I was listening to NPR yesterday and they were discussing piracy. I was unaware of all of the international law issues preventing countries from going after what we term pirates. They term themselves as the "Coast Guard", and because the government in Somalia is only a provisional one, it is unclear as to how far from their shores they claim territorial rights.

There's an interesting Wikipedia article on Somali Piracy, including a list of ships that are trying to combat it in the area... Piracy in Somalia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another recent and interesting article on piracy is here.. FT.com / Comment / Analysis - Shipping: Boarders to control

Something has to be done, but what? Increases in armed attacks against pirates will probably result in the deaths of many of the current 600+ hostages. There is only a provisional government in Somalia that has said they don't have the resources to combat the threat. The whole situation is crazy.

[Hesper]

There are no international law issues that prevent countries from going after pirates. There's only the lack of international cajones - on the part of all countries except Russia (love how they "misplaced" their capture pirates on their way home). International law has been well established for a couple of centuries that any nation capturing pirates can try them according to their own laws and do what their legal system allows.

But I still like the Russian way best.

[svs3]

Other than avoid the area altogether thereby denying the pirates potential targets and, essentially, starving the pirates out. I'm not sure what can be realistically done. Frankly, this is an area that can be easily bypassed and those who venture into it should by now know the risks.

Given the current state of the US and world economy and the turmoil here, I doubt the Americans (or Europeans), on the whole, have the stomach for an another open-ended, extremely expensive military engagement to protect a relatively few number of people voluntarily venturing into an area of known danger. Our military is stretched pretty thin at the moment and that won't change anytime soon.

Ultimately, IMO, this is problem whose solution lays on land in Somalia not at sea.

P.S. If the current world situation persists, I wouldn't be surprised to an increase in piracy in the Strait of Malacca and around Haiti, amongst other places. Worldwide piracy could get a lot worse before it gets better.

[labatt]

Here's some US case law... according to precedent, pirates can't be called pirates unless they SUCCEED in carrying out a robbery on the high seas. In other words, until they actually take property, they aren't considered pirates. In that regard, until they have actually boarded a vessel and taken control they can't be considered pirates - and by that time their hostages are, well, hostages. Six Somali pirat.... errr.. individuals were freed because of this. The acts leading to piracy are not punishable as piracy according to international laws. This is one of the reasons why captured pirates are often set free - the international military feels they don't have jurisdiction over the individuals to charge them with a crime.

Judge: Somali Pirates Who Fired on U.S. Navy Are Not Really Pirates - By Andrew C. McCarthy - The Corner - National Review Online

[tomperanteau]

Originally Posted by sailingdog

Typically, the internationally recognized standard for territorial waters is 12 NM...after that point you're generally considered to be in international waters. Some countries have a 200 Nm limit, in which they consider the waters to be in their economic zone but technically not their territory, like the US does.

Interesting. So, does this mean that if I am more than 12 nm away from the coast, the authorities in the U.S. have no jurisdiction?

[sailingdog]

Originally Posted by tomperanteau

Interesting. So, does this mean that if I am more than 12 nm away from the coast, the authorities in the U.S. have no jurisdiction?

Yes, I do believe that is the case, but a lot depends on where you're boat is flagged. If your boat is not US flagged and you're in INTERNATIONAL WATERS at that point, they do not have a presumptive right to board you. However, if you're involved in something illegal, like drug smuggling, you can probably be boarded....and have bad things happen to you should you be caught breaking US or international laws.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by tomperanteau

Interesting. So, does this mean that if I am more than 12 nm away from the coast, the authorities in the U.S. have no jurisdiction?

The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is a branch of the United States Armed Forces and one of the seven U.S. uniformed services. The Coast Guard is a maritime, military, multi-mission service unique among the military branches for having a maritime law enforcement mission (with jurisdiction in both domestic and international waters) and a federal regulatory agency mission as part of its mission set. It operates under the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime, and can be transferred to the Department of the Navy by the President at any time or Congress during time of war.
Founded by Alexander Hamilton as the Revenue Cutter Service on 4 August 1790, it lays claim to being the United States' oldest continuous seagoing service. As of August 2009, the Coast Guard had approximately 42,000 men and women on active duty, 7,500 reservists, 29,000 auxiliarists, and 7,700 full-time civilian employees.[3]
The Coast Guard's legal authority differs from the other four armed services and it operates simultaneously under Title 10 of the United States Code and its other organic authorities, e.g., Titles 6, 14, 19, 33, 46, etc. Because of its legal authority, the Coast Guard can conduct military operations under the Department of Defense or directly for the President in accordance with Title 14 USC 1–3.

It is Wikipedia, so further research might be needed.

[Argyle38]

Originally Posted by tomperanteau

Interesting. So, does this mean that if I am more than 12 nm away from the coast, the authorities in the U.S. have no jurisdiction?

Also, if your a US flagged vessel, they have jurisdiction over you anywhere. At least that's how it is with the Coast Guard.