Russia warship heads to Africa after pirate attack

Status
Not open for further replies.
By MIKE ECKEL, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 4 minutes ago

MOSCOW - A Russian warship on Friday rushed to intercept a Ukrainian vessel carrying 33 battle tanks and a hoard of ammunition that was seized by pirates off the Horn of Africa — a bold hijacking that again heightened fears about surging piracy and high-seas terrorism.
U.S. naval ships were in the area and "monitoring the situation" and a U.S. Defense Department official said Washington was concerned about the attack.
"I think we're looking at the full range of options here," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said.
It was unclear whether the pirates who seized the 530-foot-long cargo ship Faina on Thursday knew what it carried. Still, analysts said it would be extremely difficult to sell such high-profile weaponry like Russian tanks.
The hijacking, with worldwide pirate attacks surging this year, could help rally stronger international support behind France, which has pushed aggressively for decisive action against Somali pirates.
Russian navy spokesman Capt. Igor Dygalo told The Associated Press that the missile frigate Neustrashimy left the Baltic Sea port of Baltiisk a day before the hijacking to cooperate with other unspecified countries in anti-piracy efforts.
But he said the ship was then ordered directly to the Somalia coast after Thursday's attack.
According to the British-based Jane's Information Group, the Neustrashimy is armed with surface-to-air missiles, 100 mm guns and anti-submarine torpedoes.
Ukrainian Defense Minister Yury Yekhanurov, meanwhile, said the hijacked vessel Faina was carrying 33 Russian-built T-72 tanks and a substantial quantity of ammunition and spare parts. He said the tanks were sold to Kenya in accordance with international law.
Ukrainian officials and an anti-piracy watchdog said 21 crew members were aboard the seized ship, including three Russians. Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko ordered unspecified measures to free the crew, but it was unclear whether any of the former Soviet republic's naval vessels had been dispatched.
A Kenyan government spokesman, Alfred Mutua, confirmed the East African nation's military had ordered the tanks and spare parts. The tanks are part of a two-year rearmament program.
"The government is in contact with international maritime agencies and other security partners in an endeavor to secure the ship and cargo," Mutua said in a statement. "The government is actively monitoring the situation."
A person who answered the telephone at Ukrainian state-controlled arms dealer Ukrspetsexport, which brokered the sale, refused to comment, and said all requests for information must be submitted in writing.
It was unclear where the shipment originated, though Ukrainian news agencies identified the ship operator as a company called Tomex Team based in the Black Sea port of Odessa. Calls to Tomex offices went unanswered Friday.
Lt. Nate Christensen, a spokesman for the Bahrain-based U.S. 5th Fleet, told the AP that U.S. vessels were aware of the seizure and said U.S. ships were "monitoring the situation," but refused to say more: "Obviously, we are deeply concerned."
U.S. Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman said the United States was worried about the ship's cargo.
"A ship carrying cargo of that nature being hijacked off the coast of Somalia is something that should concern us, and it does concern us. And we are monitoring the situation and taking a look at what the options might be," Whitman said.
Paul Cornish, head of the international security program at the London-based think-tank Chatham House said the tanks would be difficult to sell on to a third party — private buyers or warlords, for example — because of the logistics involved with keeping them operational.
"It's not like (stealing) a container full of machine guns, where all you need is a tin of bicycle oil," he said.
Roger Middleton, another Chatham House researcher, said it was unlikely the pirates knew there were tanks aboard the Faina, and also said unloading the cargo would be difficult.
"Most of their attacks are based on opportunity. So if they see something that looks attackable and looks captureable, they'll attack it," he said.
Middleton said it was unclear how the pirates might react if confronted by military action, noting that they have fled from authorities in the past. On the other hand, he said, they are usually well-armed and organized and are based in an unstable country — Somalia.
"It could potentially get pretty messy," he said.
Long a hazard for maritime shippers — particularly in the Indian Ocean and its peripheries — high-seas piracy has triggered greater alarm since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States because of its potential as a funding and supply source for global terrorism.
Pirate attacks worldwide have surged this year and Africa remains the world's top piracy hotspot, with 24 reported attacks in Somalia and 18 in Nigeria this year, according to the International Maritime Bureau's piracy reporting center.
The issue burst into international view Sept. 15 when Somali pirates took two French citizens captive aboard a luxury yacht and helicopter-borne French commandos then swooped in to rescue them.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy this month called on other nations to move boldly against pirates, calling the phenomenon "a genuine industry of crime."
In June, the U.N. Security Council — pushed by France and the United States — unanimously adopted a resolution allowing ships of foreign nations that cooperate with the Somali government to enter their territorial waters "for the purpose of repressing acts of piracy and armed robbery at sea."
___
Associated Press writers Olga Bondaruk in Kiev, Jennifer Quinn in London, Tom Maliti in Nairobi and Lolita Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.


palestinian_flag_web.jpg

somaliasczw.jpg
SomaliFlag.JPG
ist2_2608623_somalia_flag_with_clip.jpg



b
b
 
Personally if the Russians are going to sort out the pirate nonsense then I say let them go for it.
It appear few others outside the French are prepared to sort this issue out.
 
First a question. What do Palastinians (ref the photo) have to do with this?

If the Russians are willing to take on the Pirates, then good for them. They have a right to protect their merchant vessels or any merchant vessel in international waters. They also have the right to protect any merchant vessel in Somali waters under attack by Pirates.
 
I think that the Russians being involved is ideal. Unlike so many of us Politically Correct countries, they will "bring the hammer down" if they need to, and will not care what anyone thinks about it. If necessary they will hunt the pirates down and kill them, no questions asked, and no answers given.

Some Somali pirates might attract some very unwelcome attention for their country and thereby encourage those in power in Mogadishu to do something before it gets right out of hand.
 
I said "awkward" because it's kind of embarrassing to have a shipment of dozens of tanks just kind of hijacked. Sounds like something out of a B movie.
As for the Russians getting involved... hope they show the pirates the true meaning of pain. We've got too much political correctness, complicated laws, the UN and such to do anything truly effective. Of course, since the pirates are black it'd be racist to blow them out of the water.
 
If I were one of those pirates I would bail out of the ship when I saw Ukrainian tanks. It is not worth the consequences in the least, they are not dealing with a timid western country.

You'd think with all the electronics and guidance systems in modern freighters they'd be lo-jacked by this point.
 
Last edited:
"Somalian territorial waters"?

Just a formality. Somalia has no Navy (or government) to speak of, so even if the Russians did enter (which, let's face it, they're going to), who's going to complain?

Also, a captured merchant vessel obviously qualifies as a vessel in distress, so territorial waters or not, anyone nearby capable of offering assistance is pretty much obligated to do so.
 
With modern freighters the problem is lack of speed and small crews. I worked in pirate waters (Malacca Straits and Sulu Sea) on a moderately large (150,000 ton) tanker, "Mobil Flinders". We had a total crew of 17, from the skipper to the trainee.

The best we could do was to weld interior locks onto all of the outside doors, leaving only one for access. Through the night we took turns to man a large spotlight at the stern which we used to illuminate any small vessel approaching at speed seen on the radar. If we were "light ship" the engineroom were to be warned, and if the vessel got close to the stern they were to be ready to give full astern which would have sucked any small vessel in under the counter and into the prop, the top of which was only just below the surface. (Don't mess with 104,000HP)
 
For what I am about to say, I don't want it taken out of context because I am not trying to place blame uncalled for but follow me for a second.... In 2006 The Islamic Courts took over all of Southern Somalia (Former Italian Somaliland) which is the area of Somalia that experienced the civil war, the Courts destroyed and chased away what was left of these warlords and pirates. The Somali people in Somalia and the diaspora abroad welcomed the new found of safety for the first time in 16 years, while the Islamic Courts were in control and in power in Mogadishu they instituted Sharia based laws and lawless Mogadishu became peaceful. Most of the Islamic world welcomed the Islamic Courts seizure of power and certain European countries such as Italy had their reservations but began contacts with the Courts.

The United States government began to label the Islamic Courts as terrorist without any concrete prove. The Islamic Courts said they wanted to establish relations with the Americans and cooperate with them. But the American government in fear of having an Iranian style government gain foothold in the Strategic Horn of Africa began to arm the same warlords it was fighting in 1993 in show of hypocracy that are now based in Ethiopia because they ran from the Islamic Courts in order to destabilize the Courts. The American government began to also arm, train, and finance the Ethiopian army.

The Ethiopia and Somalia have always been arch foes and fought to bloody wars in 1964 and 1977. They have always supported each others rebels in order to destablize each other. Now that the Islamic Courts were coming to power in Somalia, Ethiopia feared a strong and Islamic based nationalist government coming to power in Somalia. The Americans and Ethiopians now shared common fear of the Islamic Courts, they began to cooperate to undermine the Courts.

The American government finally gave the green light to the Ethiopian army to invade Somalia alongside the warlords it has armed in order to install the weak puppet government made up of former warlords to align themselves with Ethiopia and America. The Americans were already bogged down into bloody insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan and did not want to become tangled up in Somalia. The provided the Ethiopians diplomatic cover at the UN and shielded Ethiopia from criticism and condemnations, they sent Ethiopia after the Islamic Courts the way they sent Saddam After the Islamic government in Iran.

The Americans even attached advisers to the Ethiopian units that were spearheading the invasion, they at times even provided aircover and at times even bombed retreating Islamic Courts forces with gunships. They installed this weak, warlord infested puppet regime in Ethiopia that is despised by the people. Even the so-called current president is a former warlord that was based in Ethiopia and Kenya. As soon as the Islamic Courts were defeated and the warlords installed the pirates came back. While the Islamic Courts were in control not one pirate attack happend.

I am assigning blame not to just point fingers but to put the blame right were it belongs the American-Ethiopian intervention. Thank American government:cowb: and the Ethiopian government that these pirates and warlords came back.:bravo::drunkb:


palestinian_flag_web.jpg

somaliasczw.jpg
SomaliFlag.JPG
ist2_2608623_somalia_flag_with_clip.jpg
 
Last edited:
But to be fair can't the same thing be said of the Taliban?

They were initially welcomed by Afghans because they got rid of the warlords, created peace, stability and almost wiped out the drug industry in the space of a few short months but they just didn't know where to stop and very soon they were banning shaving, radios, fun, breathing, females, education and shooting or loping off body parts of anyone that didn't follow the rules, consequently the warlords and drugs are back.

To a large degree this is one of those no win situations, you can either have chance at freedom and deal with warlords, drugs and pirates or you can live in a repressive state doing its damnedest to drag every one back to the stone age.
 
I am assigning blame not to just point fingers but to put the blame right were it belongs the American-Ethiopian intervention. Thank American government:cowb: and the Ethiopian government that these pirates and warlords came back.:bravo::drunkb:

There's no doubt in my mind that the American government is responsible for the decline of Somalia, but in the early 1990s, not now. There was piracy around the Horn for a good long time before 2006.
 
Maybe a ride on the end of a Russian projectile, if the the Russkies go in, and I'm quite sure that unlike some nations they will not just be going down there for a look at the local scenery and they will not give a damn about world opinion.
 
LOL, 30 some tanks are a hard cargo to unload. its not AKs you can just throw into waiting hands. The russians will make sure that cargo ends up where it belongs, so the cash ends up in their pockets.:)
 
Yes Sherman, it would not surprise me if the Russkies boarded the ship, shot any local "shipkeepers" and just towed it away. The fate of the Russian crew being only a secondary consideration.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top