“The Transnational Threat From Piracy And Smuggling”
by Brigadier
(Ret) B A H Parritt CBE
The events of September 11 2001 have brought new awareness of how
interrelated transnational threats are undermining the security and stability
of many countries in the Asia-Pacific Region.
The
current threat of piracy and large scale smuggling in the Asia-Pacific Region
is serious and is growing in brutal significance. This paper will discuss the historical pattern of piracy and
smuggling, show how piracy has been eradicated in the past, outline the way the
International Community is tackling the problem now, and suggest ways that the
impetus for action emanating from the World Trade Centre atrocity could be
utilized to help counter and mitigate the scourge of piracy and large scale
smuggling.
At
the IMO Seminar and Workshop on Piracy and Armed Robbery held in Brazil, the
representative from Venezuela stated that "Captain Morgan once brought us
pain. Now, he brings us profit.” He was referring to the fact that whereas in
the eighteenth century Captain Morgan had sacked and pillaged Venezuelan towns
and shipping, now they capitalized on the word "pirate" and had
turned the pirate sites and lurid stories into tourist attractions.
It
is an interesting fact, that the word
"pirate” does create a euphemistic picture of a swashbuckling,
Errol Flynn type of man, leaping from ship to ship brandishing a cutlass,
wooing beautiful maidens, and then burying treasure on coral beaches. The reality is of course, so very different.
The
same aura of glamour also attaches to the word “smuggler.” In fact and fiction it is generally the
excise man who is the “Bad Guy”, the semi good guy is the person who beats the
tax system and brings in the contraband, epitomized in Rudyard Kiplings poem: -
Laces for a
Lady
Letters for a
Spy
Watch the wall
my darling
While the
Gentlemen go by”
Again,
the reality is very different.
Smuggling today is not now a matter of revenue evasion but is a vicious
crime involving illegal drugs and terrorist weapons.
If
we examine the history of piracy and smuggling, certain main themes constantly
emerge. A review of these themes will I
suggest lead us to conclusions about tackling these types of crime in the
future.
In
Roman times, Rome itself was brought to near starvation because pirates in the
Mediterranean, using very light craft, of shallow draft, would outrun the large
merchantmen and under the cover of darkness swarm up onto the ship, kill and
loot, and then return to their isolated, protected villages, to enjoy their
spoils.
Pompey
was given the task of destroying theses pirates and in a ruthless campaign “killed ten thousand, and captured twenty
thousand”. He eradicated the problem,
with the twin strategy of engaging the pirates at sea and then, with savage
persistence, following them ashore, totally erasing their homes and families.
THE MEDITERRANEAN
For
six centuries, the coast of Barbary became renowned for the scourge of
piracy. There was a continual stream of
valuable ships trading between the Middle and Far East carrying spices, silks,
precious stones, and slaves, all forced to stay fairly close to the shore. It was too tempting and easy to slip out
with fast light craft, and in a ferocious onslaught kill the crew, loot the
cargo and then return in triumph to a fortified town where the whole population
regarded the piracy as a totally legitimate way of earning money. Especially if the victims could be
classified as "Infidels".
For
many years, the European countries and the United States paid "Tributes”
as an inducement for the Barbary Pirates not to attack their ships. The system failed. International conferences were held and in a series of naval
operations the American Navy, a joint Anglo Dutch Force and then the French
Navy took vigorous action first at sea to sink pirate ships and then bombarded
coastal towns including Algiers. By
1830 the last of the Barbary pirates had been hung.
THE CARIBBEAN
In
the Caribbean, the same scenario emerged.
Spain and Portugal with a powerful combination of navigational skill,
entrepreneurial drive, courage and cruelty, conquered the coasts of Central and
South America. Then, using ruthless
aggressive measures forced the local populations to produce vast quantities of
gold, silver, and precious metals.
Spain became the richest nation in the world but, it was still necessary
to ship the treasures home and so large commercial vessels loaded with treasure
became an irresistible target.
It
is perhaps at this stage that in the English language, the word "pirate”
began to lose its real meaning of "sea robber.” Spain was a catholic country; Spain took violent action against
any other European country trying to trade with her "Colonies.” Spain was
therefore perceived to be an enemy by Protestant England. Francis Drake, initially, very much on his
own initiative, began to seize Spanish ships.
However, he prudently brought the treasure home and presented it to
Queen Elizabeth the First. Although not
officially at war with Spain, she condoned further expeditions and the word
"Privateer" which sounded so much better than the word
"Pirate" covered the seizing of Spanish ships and the sacking of
their towns. Spain correctly regarded
Drake, Raleigh, Frobisher, and Hawkins as pirates. Although in English history books, they are stout hearted,
robust, Devon sea dogs. This
obfuscation of the word "pirate,” like the word "terrorist,” still
exists.
Given
the large number of targets and the numerous islands of the Caribbean where the
pirates could relax, carouse and whore, piracy flourished. Gradually losing any pretence of legitimacy
and spawning such evil characters and Captain Morgan, Captain Kidd and Captain
Edward Teach better known as "Blackbeard.”
These
men were charismatic leaders and good sailors.
They had the personality to command other men and so gradually expanded
their force from individual ships to pirate squadrons and fleets capable of
attacking convoys of merchant ships men and landing and sacking towns.
They
were very successful, so successful in fact, that eventually the regular navies
of France, the Netherlands, and Great Britain joined to fight the pirates. They used the same tactics as Pompey that is
sink the pirate craft at sea, and then pursue them into their land based
strongholds to kill or hang them.
THE FAR EAST
In
the Far East, we see the same pattern.
As the European nations, began to develop trade, so treasure had to be
carried home. Piracy therefore
flourished. Once again, we had the
scenario of a large number of attractive targets, a myriad of remote islands, a
skilful seafaring community, and a local culture, which regarded stealing from
foreigners as quite acceptable and a sensible way of improving ones standard of
living.
As
in the Caribbean, leaders emerged. From
individual fishing boats boarding small traders, we had pirate fleets operating
from the Malay Peninsular, from Sarawak, from the Philippines and from China. In the early Nineteenth Century, it was estimated
that there were "tens of thousands" of armed men making their living
by pirating.
As
elsewhere, the pirates not only had the skill and courage to attack merchant
ships, but they also had land based strongholds where they could return to
relax and enjoy, or dispose, of their captives and loot.
It
was a most satisfying way of life and was most profitable. It continued, as in the Mediterranean and
the Caribbean, until there was international agreement that pirate activity
could no longer be tolerated. A cynic
might say that the catalyst for this international agreement was not because
seamen were being killed, tortured and enslaved, but because profits were being
significantly and adversely affected.
Smuggling
also falls into this category. Smuggling
does not have the same emotive power as piracy, as historically the efforts by
one country to impose their own taxes and restrictions on trade, has stimulated
a counter movement that generally attracts public support. But when smuggling does become an emotive
issue, for example the smuggling of slaves, then again the problem had to be
solved by international co-operation.
What
form did this international cooperation take?
Not surprisingly, the same formula that had been used successfully over
the past centuries i.e. deploying regular navies to defeat the pirates and
smugglers at sea, then landing to destroy their villages, killing those who
resisted, and hanging anyone thought to be involved.
Given
the threat of piracy and the fact that regular navy protection has always been
slow to arrive and of fluctuating effectiveness. History shows that
masters inevitably conclude that they must look after themselves. This historically has meant cannons,
grapeshot, firearms, swords, pikes, and homemade grenades. Robust action to defend their ship was
applauded and there was a general sense of satisfaction if, during an attack,
pirates had been killed.
A
typical example was in April 1914 when the Tai On was on route from Hong Kong
to Macao with 513 passengers and crew.
The Master, Captain Wetherell, had just gone to sleep in his cabin when
he was awakened by shots. He rushed to
the bridge in his pajamas, saw his Chief Engineer engaged in a struggle so shot
the pirate with his 10 bore shotgun. He
then picked up two revolvers, and shot through the grill leading to the Bridge
killing another man. After running out
of ammunition, he reloaded his shotgun, posted two guards with .38 revolvers
behind the bullet proof shield on the bridge then, using his torch beam to pick
out individual pirates, shot them. The
pirates set fire to the ship but a Chinese Customs launch arrived and saved the
passengers. Captain Wetherell was
commended for his bravery, as was the guard who had shot five men. Seventeen alleged pirates were arrested and
immediately decapitated. No discussion
took place about the treatment of prisoners!
Following
another attack on a passenger ship in the China Sea, a punitive expedition was
mounted against suspected villages in Bias Bay. Three were bombarded from the sea and then occupied and destroyed
by fire. This robust act was warmly
praised in the press and there was no mention of those innocent woman and
children who were inadvertently, but almost inevitably, killed in the
bombardment. “Collateral Damage” was a
phrase not yet invented.
PAST INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION
Unique
international laws have been enacted to deal with piracy, which still
apply. Sufficient to say that piracy
was regarded with such horror that navies have been given virtual "carte
blanche" to kill pirates and attack "pirate lairs.” There is no specific international law
dealing with smuggling but there are many precedents of navies combining to
take action against ships carrying suspect cargoes.
History
also shows that when the perception of piracy and smuggling diminishes, then
international co-operation ceases.
THE SITUATION TODAY
Acts
of piracy and armed robbery are increasing as the following statistics
show.
1998 - 177
1999 - 299 Increase
of 69%
2000 - 531 Increase
of 65%
The
figures for 2001 are not yet confirmed but would appear to be similar to the
year 2000, the sad difference since the number of injuries and death among
seaman has increased. Seventy-two
crewmembers are known to have been killed and 99 injured as a result of
violence. These figures are almost
certainly on the low side as Admiral Mitropoulos, Director Maritime Safety
Division of the IMO has stated, “The
published figures only portray the tip of the iceberg.” He believes that “Only one attack in three is reported to the relevant
authorities, the main reasons being, as far as ships masters are concerned, is
fear that reporting a successful act of piracy would reflect badly on a masters
competence. There is also concern that
reports of attacks would embarrass the state in whose waters the attacks occur. Another main reason is the concern that an
investigation would disrupt a vessels schedule and a delay would lead to a loss
costing more that the value of the matter stolen. There is also the possibility that insurance for ship owners
would increase as a result.”
Three
broad categories of piracy however can be discerned. First, the traditional attack from a fast craft in the hours of
darkness generally aft of the ship with the aim of stealing anything that can
be carried away. Crews are not hurt
unless they resist. Second, the
temporary hijack, when they ship is boarded by heavily armed pirates who sail
the ship to a predestined location and transfer the cargo ashore. Violence is used to intimidate the
crew. Thirdly, and of growing concern,
is where the ship itself is the target, where the cargo seems to be irrelevant
and where the crew is all murdered.
To
meet these threats, there is today an unprecedented difference. Whereas in the past, masters have been
encouraged to take up arms and praised for actively and positively protecting
themselves then, when the piracy situation has deteriorated, international
force has been deployed to provide armed protection, at the present time both
these traditional counter piracy measures have been removed. Masters are advised not to arm themselves
and international co-operation is taking the form, not of military action, but
of a series of United Nations recommendations and tentative regional bilateral
agreements.
Given
the reluctance of the major powers to send
“gunboats” into the sovereign waters of friendly states, and the
articulate reluctance of smaller states to have foreign warships patrol their
territorial waters, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) which is the
Agency of the United Nations responsible for co-coordinating maritime affairs,
has been asked to fill the vacuum and have, to their credit, taken a series of
positive measures.
They
have organized two rounds of regional conferences to discuss the problem. The conferences have been held in Singapore,
Malaysia, Indonesia, Brasilia, Lagos and Mumbai, the aim being to emphasize the
need for reporting, communication and coordinated response. At all of these conferences, agreement to
improve these measures has always been obtained.
The
IMO has also published specimen report forms to be completed after a piracy
incident and in MSC/CRC 623 “Guidance to Ship owners and Ship operators in
dealing with piracy” give practical advice.
This advice includes the following recommendations: -
1.
If
at all possible, ships should be routed away from areas where attacks are known
to have taken place and, in particular, seek to avoid “bottle necks.”
2.
Caution
should be exercised when transmitting information on cargo or valuables.
3.
Master
should authorize the broadcasting of a distress message if he feels the ship or
crew is in grave danger. But, he should
bear in mind that the distress signal is provided for use only in case of
imminent danger.
4.
Ships should use the maximum lighting but
must not keep on deck lights when underway.
5.
Ships
are not recommended to travel “blacked out”
6.
Secure
areas should be established but requirements of safety are paramount when
considering locking.
7.
All
crewmembers not engaged on essential outside duties should remain within a
secure area within hours of darkness.
8.
Distress
flares should only be used when the Master considers that the attackers'
actions are putting his ship in imminent danger.
9.
The
Master should consider “riding off” attackers craft by heavy wheel movements
but maneuvers of this kind should not be used in confined or congested waters
for example in the Malacca and Singapore Straits. Responses of this kind could lead to reprisals by the attackers
and should not be engaged in unless the Master is convinced he can use them to
advantage and without risk to those on board.
10.
The
first aim of the Master and Crew should be to secure the greatest level of
safety for those on board the ship.
11.
The
possibility of a sortie by well-organized crew has in the past successfully
persuaded attackers to leave a ship, but the use of this tactic is only
appropriate if it can be undertaken at no risk to the crew.
12.
Crewmembers
should not seek to come between the attackers and their craft and nor should
they seek to capture attackers as to do so may increase the resistance of the
attackers.
13.
There
will be many circumstances when compliance with the attackers' demands will be
the only safe alternative and when resistance or obstruction of any kind could
be both futile and dangerous.
These selected extracts from MSC/CRC 623 make it quite clear that fire arms should not be used, and that the best way of protecting the crew is to get them to run to a secure area, do nothing to antagonize the robbers, and be positive in trying to help them loot the ship.
We have reached a situation where traditional
measures to protect mariners by providing regular navy support is no longer
acceptable to the major naval powers and is proving a very difficult task for
smaller countries with large sea coasts and limited naval resources. As an alternative, the IMO has been tasked
to launch repeated initiatives to arrange local international
co-operation. This is a worthy
strategic objective. But when giving
practical advice to Masters on how to deal with pirates, the IMO finds it
necessary to cover any positive action on the part of the Master with a cloak
of “politically correct" warnings of the consequences of using force.
Many
Masters agree with the line taken by the IMO.
They believe that using force to resist attack by pirates, significantly
increases the risk of physical injury and that the commercial value of a ship
or cargo does not warrant the risk of such physical injury.
There
are others however, who resent such a policy and feel that if naval protection
cannot be provided against murdering thugs, then Maritime Legislation should be
made more flexible to support a Master who does decide he is not going to hand
over his ship.
REGIONAL CO-OPERATION
Piracy
is as old as history. History tells us
that piracy has only been eradicated when international regular naval action
has been taken to destroy pirates, both at sea and on land.
In
2002, nations with large navies do not wish to deploy their forces against
pirates, and neither do the smaller coastal states wish them to do so. Instead of major naval powers using armed
action, the IMO has been tasked to encourage the smaller nations to co-operate
and co-ordinate their naval protection.
But, given the extent of the problem and the limitation of resources
this policy has, at best, only been partially successful.
Masters
therefore are expected to protect themselves.
The unprecedented situation today is that, although pirates are better
equipped and organized, masters are now strongly recommended not to take
actions, which might "antagonize" the robbers. They are certainly advised not to carry
firearms.
There
may be merit in this argument, but it is creating a policy that will inevitably
result in a disaster. Sooner or later,
a pirate incident will occur which will result in a major environmental,
ecological, or human catastrophe. Then
the "stable doors" will be banged shut.
Similarly
with smuggling. Coordinated action with
regards to illegal drug smuggling has produced results. But it is still a fact that the majority of
illegal drugs and illegal immigrants are at some stage transported by sea. There is little coordinated action with
regard to the transport of terrorist weapons or weapons of mass
destruction.
“9/11”
The
atrocity in New York in September 2001 has acted as a catalyst for the world to
take another look at ways of improving the security of people from acts of
violence. Piracy and smuggling falls
into this category. Sailors are being
killed and injured, cargoes are being stolen, illegal drugs are being carried,
and opportunities are given to wicked people to carry out acts of
terrorism. A fresh concerted,
coordinated International effort is required.
Only when strong naval forces are deployed in the area committed to
capturing or killing pirates, and there is a rigorous application of
international law to punish all those who benefit from piracy and smuggling
will this scourge be eradicated.
There
is a way to do it. This year on 22
January 2002, the IMO published A/Res.922 establishing a “Code of Practice for
the Investigation of the Crimes of Piracy and Armed Robbery against ships.”
The
Code clearly sets out the problem:
·
“Recognizing
with deep concern the grave danger to safety of life at sea, maritime safety
and the protection of the maritime environment arising from acts of piracy and
armed robbery against ships.
·
Recognizing
also that the number of acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships
continues to increase worldwide.
·
Being
aware that the fight against piracy and armed robbery against ships is often
impeded by the absence of effective legislation in some countries for the investigation
of reported cases of piracy and armed robbery against ships.
·
Being
also aware that, when arrests are made, some Governments are lacking the
legislative framework and adequate guidelines for investigation necessary to
allow conviction and punishment of those involved in acts of piracy and armed
robbery against ships.
·
Being
convinced of the need for a code of practice to be adopted and promulgated as
soon as possible.
·
Being
also convinced of the need for Governments to co-operate and to take, as a
matter of the highest priority, all necessary action to prevent and suppress
any acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships”.
The IMO makes the following
recommendations:
·
“Invites
Governments to co-operate in the interests of safety of life at sea and
environmental protection by increasing their efforts to suppress and prevent
acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships.
·
“Invites
Governments to develop, as appropriate, agreements and procedures to facilitate
co-operation in applying efficient and effective measures to prevent acts of
piracy and armed robbery against ships.
·
Encourages
Governments to apply the provisions of international instruments aimed at
improving safety of life at sea and the prevention and suppression of acts of
piracy and armed robbery against ships”.
In
2002, the IMO reacting to strong pressure from the United States is to review
current International Law dealing with terrorism. Quite fortuitously also in 2002, the IMO has produced clear
robust requests for Governments to take a fresh look at their legislation with
regard to piracy. This coincidence of
timing presents an unexpected albeit wonderful opportunity to turn the new anti
piracy recommendations into positive action.
It
may mean a change in various governments defence plans and operations, but if
the recommendations of A22/Res.92 are genuinely to be enforced, then piracy and
smuggling should be included in President Bush’s “War against terrorism”.
Piracy
and smuggling only stops when criminals come to believe that they are more
likely to get shot, than get rich, if they break the law. `The world should seize the opportunity
presented by President Bush’s initiative and combine piracy and smuggling with
terrorism. Life at sea would then be
much safer.