U.S. Weighs Changes in Strategy to Fight Pirates

WSJ ^ | Apr 18, 2009 | By JOHN W. MILLER and PETER SPIEGEL

[zaphod3000]

Senior Pentagon planners are debating a shift in military strategy to crack down on piracy off the coast of Somalia in the Gulf of Aden.

Longstanding rules of engagement followed by the U.S. and other nations usually prohibit dramatic hostage rescues like the one that saved Richard Phillips, captain of the Maersk Alabama, unless military forces can overpower pirates with low risk to prisoners.

SNIP

Some Pentagon officials now want to formulate policy to encourage more daring commando raids, according to U.S. military officials. They say a mix of special operations forces and conventional Navy assets at sea would be able to pinpoint pirate gangs on land and attack them once they move into water.

"Whatever happened to punitive expeditions?" says a senior military official, who is involved in discussions about Somali strategy. "That used to be part of what we did."......

SNIP

The 20-odd warships from a dozen countries patrolling the Texas-size Gulf since October are deployed under United Nations resolution 1816, which authorizes "all necessary means" to deter piracy. But how to act "comes down to the individual nation's interpretation," Navy Vice Admiral William Gortney told a congressional committee last month.

SNIP

European Union officials say the U.S. wouldn't find many allies if it tried to coordinate commando operations to save hijacked ships. "We don't want bloodbaths," an EU official says.

Many U.S. military officials say that in the case of a high-seas hostage standoff, time is on the navies' side, because they can wear down the will of pirates, who aren't usually driven by ideology -- and have limited resources.

[irishtenor]

Just shoot anyone who says “AARRRGGGGHHHH”.

[DannyTN]

I just heard on CBS News that they are trying to figure out how to get the pirates employed in something other than pirating.

Pirate Bailout!!!

[BarnacleCenturion]

[Diogenesis]

"Enemy in the White House; BHO Blocked Navy from Rescuing Captain
"1. BHO wouldn’t authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.
2. Once they arrived, BHO imposed restrictions on their ROE that they couldn’t do anything unless the hostage’s life was in “imminent” danger
3. The first time the hostage jumped, the SEALS had the raggies all sighted in, but could not fire due to ROE restriction
4. When the navy RIB came under fire as it approached with supplies, no fire was returned due to ROE restrictions. As the raggies were shooting at the RIB, they were exposed and the SEALS had them all dialed in.
5. BHO specifically denied two rescue plans developed by the Bainbridge CPN and SEAL teams.
6. Bainbridge CPN and SEAL team CDR finally decide they have the OpArea and OSC authority to solely determine risk to hostage. 4 hours later, 3 dead raggies
7. BHO immediately claims credit for his “daring and decisive” behaviour. As usual with him, it’s BS."
"Almost immediately following word of the rescue, the Obama administration and its supporters claimed victory against pirates in the Indian Ocean and declared that the dramatic end to the standoff put paid to questions of the inexperienced president’s toughness and decisiveness.
Despite the Obama administration’s (and its sycophants’) attempt to spin yesterday’s success as a result of bold, decisive leadership by the inexperienced president, the reality is nothing of the sort.
What should have been a standoff lasting only hours — as long as it took the USS Bainbridge and its team of NSWC operators to steam to the location —
became an embarrassing four day and counting standoff between a ragtag handful of criminals with rifles and a U.S. Navy warship. "

[freeangel]

How about just blowing their seaside retreats into the water?

[freedumb2003]

How about just blowing their seaside retreats into the water?

That is EXACTLY what we should be doing.

[Polybius]

European Union officials say the U.S. wouldn't find many allies if it tried to coordinate commando operations to save hijacked ships.

Their ships. Their crews. Their problem.

On the U.S. side, we need to ensure the pirates that there is only one thing to be won from hijacking a U.S. flagged ship:

[Polybius]

BHO wouldn’t authorize the DEVGRU/NSWC SEAL teams to the scene for 36 hours going against OSC (on scene commander) recommendation.

The original source for this is "some of my SEAL buddies" so this needs to be confirmed.

If true, it is unbelievably irresponsible.

In such a situation, the most precious thing is time and you lose nothing by getting the assets you may need to the scene as fast as possible. If you end up not using them, you have only wasted aviation fuel. If you end up needing assets and not having them, you end up with another Clinton-style "Blackhawk down" fiasco.

[angkor]

In the year 2009:

“European Union officials say the U.S. wouldn’t find many allies if it tried to coordinate commando operations to save hijacked ships. “We don’t want bloodbaths,” an EU official says.”

In the year 1801:

“...The effectiveness of Tripoli’s corsairs had long since deteriorated, but their reputation alone was enough to prompt European maritime states to pay the tribute extorted by the pasha.... In May, 1801, the United States refused to succumb to the increasing demands of the Pacha of Tripoli; in return, the Pacha declared war against the States.”

[kaehurowing]

Hanging them would be a start.

[jimfree]

Raids on the bases I might support. I’m hearing in this discussion echos of Mayaguez and Desert One, both high-casualty and one a terrible failure.

[JimRed]

Hunt them using decoys; it works with ducks and geese!

[TigersEye]

Parrot decoys would probably work better than plastic ducks and geese.