Pirate Views

reviews

2010-01-31T08:15:00.000-08:00

Langata Rules received two generous reviews this week, the first from Barbara McMichael, syndicated from the Bellingham Herald as the Northwest Bookmonger, and the second from John Larsen of the Tacoma Weekly newspaper group. Here are links:

http://www.tacomaweekly.com/article/4002

http://www.bellinghamherald.com/entertainmentnews/story/1256150.html

Piracy is NOT a sideshow

2010-01-19T11:17:00.000-08:00

The headline in the Financial Times is clear: "Piracy is a Sideshow for Our Navies."

The article, by Brooke Smith-Windsor, argues a) incidents of piracy are actually rare and b) using navy warships to combat piracy is fairly ineffective.

Mr Smith-Windsor goes on to attribute the uproar to profiteering: insurers and shippers promote the pirate scare because it helps them raise prices.

Let's grant the second argument, about the cost-effectiveness of warships against pirates. Even in a constrained theater like the Gulf of Aden, there's a lot of water to cover; in the Indian Ocean it's way worse.

Like having a couple of squad cars patrolling Manhattan: they'll miss a lot.

But for now, we don't have many alternatives - assuming we intend to fight piracy.

And combat technology is improving. The anti-piracy fleet deploys helicopters to increase the patrol radius; and satellites help track the larger pirate vessels as they get farther out to sea. After all, an ocean-going freighter converted to piracy isn't exactly a speed boat, so tracking these "mother ships" makes it possible to close in on them.

The first argument - the rarity of pirate attacks - is less compelling. It's like saying, "99 percent of airplanes land without fatalities, so quit nattering about airline safety."

Is piracy the biggest threat in the world? Nope. But is it worth engagement?

INTERPOL thinks so, today convening a two-day, closed-door conference in Lyon FR on the subject of piracy financing. The concern: the potential for financial links between terrorist organizations and pirates.

And when nuclear parts are shipped through the Indian Ocean, there's the potential for terrorists - working thru pirates - to get access.

Set aside the loss of life and economic impacts. The terror link alone is enough to keep piracy out of the sideshow and in a ring of its own.

You can read the FT article at this link:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/907f19cc-038a-11df-a601-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

The Washington Post on INTERPOL's conference at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/19/AR2010011901535.html

news, non piratical

2010-01-12T18:42:00.000-08:00

had an excellent interview with Nick Phillips today; his show - the Advocate - tentatively will run Feb 4 in the Cleveland metro

Michelle Merritt's new book about love and becoming whole in Italy is about to launch; check it out on nightinrome.com

Bilal Blows the Pipeline on Big Glass Cases

2010-01-03T12:05:00.000-08:00

Big Glass Cases [http://bigglasscases.blogspot.com/] will feature a segment from Langata Rules tomorrow [Jan 4]; it's the segment in which Bilal and his raiders blow up the oil pipeline.

This is an interesting blog, a hybrid of Sarah's very candid musings and pieces of other people's work.

Thanks, Sarah, for the chance to appear.

more on China

2010-01-01T06:57:00.001-08:00

A few days ago we learned China is sending a battle fleet to the Gulf of Aden, to work with the EU/U.S. anti-piracy fleet. Now India's Brahmand Defense and Aerospace News reports the Chinese do not plan to establish their own base, but instead will support their fleet from bases already in place.

This seems like more good news, at least for China/NATO relations. Every collaboration opens the door to another.

And collaboration could come in handy on topics beyond piracy. Maybe.

A few come to mind: climate change; nuclear weapons; African HIV-AIDS.

You know, little stuff.

new year

2010-01-01T06:43:00.000-08:00

Lots of coverage of the "record year" for piracy. Gawker.com has a fine ironic piece, noting how pirate revenue is driving up the price of men's shoes in Somalia.

The discussion on Gawker is intriguing. I posted as drewalexander [our hero :); my name was taken] and commented on how conflicted we seem to be about piracy, how we're torn between the romance of lawlessness and the value of laws.

One participant said, 'as long as pirates don't hurt anyone, piracy's fine with me.' Another talked about the pirates just taking money from mega-corporations and corrupt governments.

These may not be such well-rounded views.

We've talked previously about the "pirate tax" - the $100 or so the pirate threat adds to the cost of oil for every U.S. household. So clearly the impact goes beyond a few plutocrats.

As for people being hurt, we appreciate pirates saying please and thank you. But if they courteously hijack a freighter full of chemicals and run it aground, or sell it to a terrorist group for conversion to weapons, "being hurt" takes on a different meaning.

ocean boundaries blurring?

2009-12-28T16:09:00.000-08:00

a positive by-product of Somali piracy may be enhanced cooperation between NATO and China.

according to a Washington Post Foreign Service posting by Maureen Fan on December 18 from Beijing, China is sending a 'naval fleet' - including two destroyers - to fight piracy off Somalia and in the Gulf of Aden.

sources in Beijing told Fan this is the first time China has collaborated with other countries in a 'battle task.'

six Chinese ships have been attacked recently in the region around the Horn of Africa. until now, the EU and the U.S. have borne the military burden in the area.

one dimension worth watching: how collaborative will the Chinese and NATO forces be?

practically it makes sense for them to work together; politically, we'll see.

good news about Chinese crew

2009-12-28T15:57:00.000-08:00

the NY Times has a Reuters report from Beijing, announcing the safe return of 25 crew members from the Chinese freighter De Xin Hai. the ship was carrying coal from South Africa to India when it was seized October 19, off the Horn of Africa.

the report does not comment on the disposition of the ship or its cargo, nor on the condition of the hostages.

Chinese sources did not comment on ransom, but a pirate claims $4 million [U.S.?] was delivered to the freighter as ransom for the crew.

hopefully the crew members are unharmed; their release is good news.

coming soon

2009-12-25T07:24:00.000-08:00

a quick update on things Langata:

in a few weeks I'll be on Nick Phillips' Advocate on Cleveland radio WHK, 1420 AM...looks like the show airs Thursday night, January 14...a prominent Ohio attorney, Mr Phillips' guests come from around the country...he combines thoughtful questions with a knack for hospitality...I'm looking forward to it

here at home - sunny, dry Tacoma WA, at least today - I'll read and sign books at Kings Books on Sunday afternoon, January 31, from 3 to 5...if I were alone, it could get lonely...but I'll join Congressman Adam Smith, chair of the House Subcommittee on Terrorism, and Mark Lindquist, now Pierce County Prosecutor, and author of King of Methlehem...they both have 'long coat tails' - I'm fortunate to catch a ride...Kings Books is a great community resource: hosting readings and letter press exhibits, and providing meeting space for lots of organizations...oh yeah, they have books too

more pirate tax math

2009-12-20T07:16:00.000-08:00

yesterday we saw the impact of the "pirate tax" on the fuel cost of the U.S. military.

but the Department of Defense only accounts for about two percent of U.S. petro fuel consumption.

this means the entire country pays a pirate tax on fuel of about $10 billion, or $33 a year for each person in the U.S.

this is VERY approximate, and is only true if piracy costs spread world-wide and are sustained over time.

so these numbers could be much higher than reality.

on the other hand...

the only cost in the calculation is insurance [based on the article in the Daily Nation, cited yesterday]; we know piracy adds other costs to shipping besides increased insurance

pirates add $200 million to U.S. military fuel costs

2009-12-19T14:57:00.000-08:00

the Sunday edition of Kenya's Daily Nation reports the impact of piracy on the cost of crude oil [link below]

according to the report, an oil freighter with 80,000 metric tonnes of crude will pay up to $1 million [U.S.] for various types of insurance [other costs - such as armor, hazard pay for crews, higher fuel costs for evasive routes et al. - are not reflected in this number]

using rough calculations [pls see below] I estimate this cost translates to four cents a gallon at the pump, or something over one percent increase in the cost of gasoline.

not huge for the family car; the average American household uses about 775 gallons a year, so the cost of piracy insurance is about $30 a year. it's inflationary, but hey...

the numbers get a little bigger if you pump gas for U.S. Department of Defense (DoD).

DoD is the single largest institutional user of petroleum fuels in the country, consuming close to two percent of all used in the U.S. [source for this and other DoD data is a Deloitte study on military energy consumption; link below]

how much gas? 120 million barrels a year - or 5 billion gallons.

now that four cents a gallon starts to add up. up to about $200 million a year in increased fuel costs.

this is not good.

ignore the family car; ignore the big delivery fleets like FedEx and UPS and USPS. pirates are costing American taxpayers $200 million a year just in the cost of fuel for our military.

even if only ships in the Middle East pay this piracy tax, the cost of crude around the world will float up. did I mention this is not good?

the Sunday Nation: http://www.nation.co.ke/business/news/-/1006/827090/-/item/0/-/ly2sg2/-/index.html

the Deloitte study: http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-UnitedStates/Local%20Assets/Documents/us_ad_energy%20security.pdf

cost per gallon calculation:

$1 million per ship for added insurances [Nation article]
80,000 metric tonnes of crude per ship [Nation article]
about 7 barrels in a metric tonne, meaning ship has 560,000 barrels
about 42 gallons in a barrel, meaning ship has about 23.5 million gallons
dividing the $1 million added cost among the 23.5 million gallons, we get 4.2
cents per gallon

From Bad to Worse: What If Pirates Go To Scale?

2009-12-14T14:15:00.000-08:00

The other day we talked about pirates consolidating, from many small gangs into fewer big ones. It's a natural business pattern, like breakfast cereal or software.

But why should we care?

A few problems are obvious. Bigger pirate gangs can pursue bigger targets, like oil freighters. Which means a bigger impact on the global economy. And bigger gangs can attack multiple targets simultaneously, diluting the effectiveness of their pursuers.

But there may be geo-political risks as well.

Imagine insurgents joining forces with a large pirate band, to achieve military objectives. The Taliban, for example, could put pressure on Pakistan by using pirates to disrupt shipping near Pakistani ports on the Arabian Sea.

Or a government without a navy - say Iraq after 1991 - might engage pirates to bother military foes, or disrupt commerce for political purposes, or re-create the privateers of centuries ago, sharing takings from combatants.

Or the pirates themselves might seek political or governmental attributes, trying to get territory or legal recognition.

At the moment these scenarios seem far-fetched. But if we see pirate bands with a few dozen ocean-going vessels, or they get air capability - like a small helicopter fleet, for example - we might be on the verge of Pirate Navy/Pirate Nation.

Not good news.

A note: we recently mentioned the excellent reporting of Bloomberg's Gregory Viscusi, but said he's London-based. Wrong. He's based in Paris.

2009-12-14T14:14:00.001-08:00

skip to main | skip to sidebar
pirate views

Saturday, December 12, 2009
consolidation in the piracy business
Consolidation is a natural law of business. Over time, some competitors get bigger and dominate smaller ones. Market share creates more market share. Over time, "mature" industries tend to be dominated by a few very big players.

We saw this in organized crime in the 1940s and '50s: lots of scattered gangs stopped fighting each other, banded together into larger "families," divided territory and prospered, to the point they created an international gambling haven [Las Vegas] and dominated industries like waste hauling and trucking.

Why should piracy be different?

We're already seeing pirates move to the open ocean, take over large, high value cargo like oil and weapons, and create banking and communications systems to meet their needs. Pirates - at least those working off the coast of Africa - are creating a "rational" environment in which to do business.

What are the conditions that make this possible?

First, Somali pirates - responsible for half the piracy in the world - have a common culture and historic experience. This is akin to the Jewish or Sicilian heritage shared by organized crime figures in the mid-20th century. But forget crime. Anyone who's tried merging two companies or two families understands how helpful - though intangible - a shared culture can be.

Second, these pirates face a common enemy: Atalanta, the combat fleet organized by NATO and the EU. As we mentioned in yesterday's post, this fleet is winning the battle for the Gulf of Aden, and so Somali pirates are moving farther out to sea, toward India. This "scaling up" requires bigger and better equipment and more people. Both needs can be met by some kind of partnership.

So if this "rationalization" of the pirate "business" is taking place, what are the implications? I'll speculate, not too wildly, next time.
Posted by ken miller at 9:54 AM 0 comments
Labels: piracy, pirates
Friday, December 11, 2009
pirates going 1,000 miles - 1,600 KM - off shore
The EU may broaden its year-old effort to fight pirates off the Horn of Africa, reports London-based Gregory Viscusi on Bloomberg.com. The fleet of 25 warships has cut piracy in the Gulf of Aden in half compared with last year; but pirates have adjusted by moving farther into the Indian Ocean - and closer to India.

By using converted fishing trawlers and other large craft as "mother ships," the pirates can travel the same sea lanes as the biggest freighters, launching small, agile vessels when it's time to attack.

The Indian Ocean presents different - and in some ways bigger - challenges than the Gulf of Aden. Without more resources, the EU may have to reduce its successful efforts in the Gulf, and risk a kind of shell game, with the pirates moving back and forth to waters less patrolled.

[This would be a problem in itself. But it could also encourage greater coordination among the pirates. More on this soon.]

Viscusi writes the EU operation - with strong U.S. involvement - costs more than $700 million annually. That's a lot of money; but it's a small part of the estimated $20 billion impact of piracy world-wide.

For Viscusi's complete piece: bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601116&sid=al9fxUIib3RM
Posted by ken miller at 10:09 AM 0 comments
Labels: piracy, pirates
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Followers
Blog Archive

* ▼ 2009 (2)
o ▼ December (2)
+ consolidation in the piracy business
+ pirates going 1,000 miles - 1,600 KM - off shore

About Me

ken miller
I'm the author of Langata Rules: Pirates at Lat 10, an adventure novel about piracy off the Horn of Africa. In researching the book I've developed a strong interest in the links among piracy, terrorism and development. The foreword to the novel, by Congressman Adam Smith, makes the case for dealing with failed states in both military and economic terms. If you'd like to read the foreword or a chapter from the novel, pls let me know

View my complete profile