[Gritty]

...did it propose any solutions ...

Not really.

The author (as well as many maritime security authorities) assumes the problem will get worse as terrorists adopt the ways of criminal pirates, despite the efforts of international law enforcement - which is woefully unmanned and unprepared for the massive task.

Part of the problem is the crews of ships being infiltrated by terrorists, who bide their time and have access to hiring organizations headquartered in third world countries. Therefore, good intelligence on backgrounding may help some but is unlikely to have much affect. Look how easy it is to cross borders or change identities to those with the resources.

It is very difficult to protect civilian ships by nonlethal means. Many of the crews are untrained and would refuse in any case to use lethal force. Many larger ships nowadays do have nonlethal defensive "weapons", such as high pressure hoses and robot dummies. But the pirates are smart and study passing ships - much like lions study passing herds - to find the weak ones they can attack.

There is little chance of civilian ships being properly armed or hiring sufficient lethal private security because of various national and international laws. In addition to the increased danger of arming a ship which may contain sleeper pirates or terrorists, there is the fear of liability on the part of the ship owners as well as the distinct possibility of more bloodshed and active revenge against the shipping company assets and personnel on the part of the pirate or terrorist organizations who could quickly wreck these shipping companies and destroy their ships.

The Coast Guard's big nightmare is a LGVV (liquid gas) tanker being high-jacked and then driven directly into a major U.S. harbor to blow it up. The results would be catastrophic.

As oil exceeds $90 a barrel, look for more of these multi-million dollar cargos to be taken down as the ships hijacked and possibly wrecked.

[Steelerfan]

Thanks for the detailed response. I am old enough to remember the tanker war in the Gulf where there was talk of fitting supertankers with chaff and other antimissile systems, but I recall it being rejected for much the same reasons you described. In a way, some of these concerns are similar to those that made the “classic” pirates successful, for economic reasons merchant ship crews were small in number compared to pirate crews and not well enough paid to have any incentive to fight off a pirate attack (and the pirates would kill everyone on board a ship that resisted). Better to surrender and take your chances.

Thanks again for the information