A brief note from a changing world
As negotiations started for the release of a Saudi-owned supertanker seized by pirates off Somalia, the Indian Navy said on Wednesday that one of its warships fought a battle at sea with would-be hijackers in the Gulf of Aden, sinking one suspect vessel and forcing the pirates to abandon a second as they fled.(...) Cyrus Mody, of the International Maritime Bureau, which monitors global piracy, said in a telephone interview from London that the shipping industry had been urging stronger naval measures against the pirates' "mother ships" for some time and would approve of the Indian Navy's action. "This is the sort of action which should be taken to try to deal with the situation," he said. Peter Hinchliffe, the marine director of the International Chamber of Shipping in London, said in a separate telephone interview that the Indian Navy's action "is going to start to bring the message home" to pirates "that the international community really is ranged against them."(...) This year, at least 92 ships have been attacked in and around the Gulf of Aden, more than triple the number in 2007, according to the International Maritime Bureau. At least 14 of those ships, carrying more than 250 crew members, are still in the control of hijackers. New York Times
With all the speculations about new
presidential appointments, readers may have missed one of those news
items that alert the watchful to the arrival of a new era.
An Indian Navy warship has engaged and destroyed a Somali pirate vessel.
The Indian Navy has taken up "the white man's burden", formerly the exclusive of European empires and on their disappearance, the United States of America.
Much of most of the world's relatively cheerful acquiescence to American military and financial supremacy has always been the guarantee of "law and order" around the world, twenty four times seven that people thought the US forces provided. Much of the value of the dollar and America's subsequent prosperity is based on the world's trust in that implicit guarantee.
An enormous Saudi oil tanker, the Sirius Star, carrying two million barrels of oil valued at around $100 million to the United States itself has been hijacked off the coast of Somalia. The mastodontic, but overstretched, US Navy itself seems strangely ineffective in this crisis.
People call for the "Seventh Cavalry" and the "Indians" come to the rescue instead.
What could be a clearer sign of a changing world than that?
http://seaton-newslinks.blogspot.com/
The Indian Navy had a shot and the took it. Good for them. However, claiming this represents a changing face is just a tad simplistic.
The Indian Navy is part of a larger multinational anti-piracy task force task force made up --ITS Durand de la Penne (flagship, destroyer D560, Italy), FGS Karlsruhe (frigate F212, Germany), FGS Rhön (auxiliary A1443, Germany), HS Themistokles (frigate F465, Greece), TCG Gokova (frigate G496, Turkey), HMS Cumberland (frigate F85, United Kingdom), USS The Sullivans (destroyer DDG 68, USA)
And this:
According to this, the U.S. is "keen" on India's involvement:
With India rushing its warship to Gulf of Aden after pirates attacked cargo ships carrying its nationals, the US says it is keen to partner with New Delhi to jointly patrol the high seas off the African coast to deter the armed outlaws.
"The Indian ships presence in Gulf of Aden will provide both of us an opportunity to work together (against pirates) and we are looking forward to it," said US Navy Captain Kenneth J Norton on board USS Ronald Reagan, the world's largest warship, as it sailed in the Arabian Sea about 130 miles off Goa coast.
Washington's views on Indian warship patrolling the region comes in the wake of over 35 incidents of piracy attacks on cargo ships in Gulf of Aden in the last three months.
So the changing face may be more about actual multi-national cooperation than one country taking the lead over another.
Also the recent tanker incident caught a few by surprise since it happened approx 450-500 mile outside the normal operating area of the Somali Pirates.
November 19, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Update: Please now add Russia to the mix
November 19, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I saw the news of the Indian Navy on the WP web site.
Just for the record I read this post because I saw you had enabled comments. On the other hand I skipped your two most previous "sermons" because comments were disabled. I call them sermons as without discussion that what they would seem to be.
Welcome back.
November 19, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chris,
Your comment just came in before mine did. I'm going to leave this post "comment connected" (leaving it on was an accident when correcting a typo) and see what happens. I don't mind civilized comments even if they are totally and sharply in disagreement with me, I am no tender blossom, but if the personal insults start up again, I'll have to disconnect. I just refuse to put up with that or give it space.
November 19, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the other hand you could always leave comments enabled and enable to community to attempt to regulate the mindless name calling commenters.
Truthseeker put up a post yesterday which was widely recommended and which resulted in a very civil discussion.
November 19, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
But it wasn't just a matter of enabling comments. TS's post yesterday was well-written and well-reasoned. It was sufficiently well-reasoned that even though it was defending Hillary, it didn't draw flak from any "Hillary Haters".
DS is fully capable of writing things that are well-written and well-reasoned too. But he has an anti-Obama axe to grind. And grinding that axe is such an obsession that a post like this one that isn't grinding that axe is highly unusual for him. (But I don't know about the last two that had comments disabled.)
What happens when you grind the same axe every day, day after day, day after day, day after day? What's left doesn't even look like an axe any more, but more like bludgeon: dull and pointless.
But he hates it when people point that out. On the other hand, other than changing the picture and slapping on a new metaphor, he's got very little to add to his near-daily vomitus of "Obama sucks and his presidency is doomed and we're all doomed because Obama sucks".
He'll disable comments again. He lasted two posts that way this time. I'll bet he can't go ten posts in a row this next time.
November 19, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Folks who tire of the "vomitus" should just not comment. I say that knowing that sometimes I post a comment and later wished I had just let it go by without comment.
November 19, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sweet. :)
November 19, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good comment foxy!
If only guys like you posted comments there wouldn't be any problem at all, but I gotta shut it down before the toilet troop arrives.
November 19, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
So sooner or later the coalition of navies is gonna have to go after the pirates on land. It's the shores of Tripoli redux. Question is, do we have the stomache to see American forces on the ground in Somalia again, even as part of a multi-national anti-piracy task force?
Oh and David, as JS Fox noted above, the US Navy has not abdicated responsibility for law and order on the high seas to the Indian Navy, as the tone of your post seemed to insinuate to me. Enforcement on the oceans is a daunting task, and it's good to see a community of nations working together.
November 19, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Much of the value of the dollar depends and has always depended on America's protecting the world's sea lanes, and historically it is one of the Republic's first principals.
November 20, 2008 2:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Much more significant than naval enforcement is India touching down on the moon. That's news.
You might understand I am not feeling generous considering your selfish need to clutter our blogroll without participating. Then again, you haven't shown any tendency to being considerate of others, only thin-skinned about criticism, (ooh, it's mean language), so you likely won't understand my point.
The only thing you've added, I can see, is Johnny Depp to another picture, cluttering bandwidth as well as the list. Piracy is an annoyance, from the point of view of 99.9% of the world. Exporters and ship owners and underwriters, not mention crew, feel differently, of course. But I ain't any of the above.
November 19, 2008 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Piracy is not an "annoyance" it is a fundamental challenge to international commerce and freedom of the seas. Much of international law has its origins in fighting piracy. It had disappeared for so long that, like polio and smallpox, people forgot to get their vaccinations.
November 20, 2008 2:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I meant that because the world is no longer mostly unmapped uncivilized territory, but instead mostly governed, piracy is a low-level constant irritant, like most crime in most countries.
That it is not the main worry now, unlike at the time of our founding, says much.
November 20, 2008 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I really can't agree that this is low level nuisance. This year alone the Somali Pirates will cost the shipping Co's 50 million dollars. These pirates if allowed to go unchecked will drive up the costs of all good shipped, including oil.
Then look at this Interactive Piracy Map and you will see this is just not an issue isolated to Somalia. It's just the most active.
So all in all I would put piracy at a higher level than just a nuisance.
Just a nuisance doesn't attract and bring in the Navies of NATO, Russia, India, China and now Kenya.
November 20, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
$50 million sounds pretty tiny compared to world shipping activity. That's half of one Saudi tanker load. Those Somalis just blew that average to hell.
I would say that excepting a couple of choke points like the Molucca Strauts it is entirely manageable, given continued efforts. I don't discount that effort, but perspective is useful here.
November 20, 2008 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I notice that the moderators have put a "report abuse" button under every comment. I would say that I'm satisfied with that and will not disable comments again with that protection in place.
As to my Obama "obsession"... what I have been pointing out, Cassandra like, for months is now something that anyone can see and are seeing. Barack Obama is just Tony Blair with a cool, all over tan.
You are going to have all the war, wiretaps, enhanced interrogations and lobbyists that you had with Bush, but instead of Cheney's sneer and Bush's dyslexia you'll have it all with vacuous speeches delivered in rhythmic cadences and brilliant smiles under cool designer sun glasses. Dysneyland.
I don't have to bang on this drum anymore.
November 20, 2008 1:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
We're all in favor of that outcome.
Time to work on your tan.
November 20, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
David, you see it gratuitous remarks like this that set people off.
You could have just as easily left off the cool, all over tan I find it irrelevant to your point. And no it's not so obvious that he is like Tony beyond some reasonably good looks.
Wow, just wow. Now this is a pretty broad damnation without any proof in evidence. The only thing I see in this statement that will end up probably being a fact is the Lobbyists. Short of putting rat poison up and down K street I don't see how we get rid of them completely ;) As to the rest pure conjecture lacking any facts in evidence.
So as oft been said, your are entitled to your own opinion, not your own facts.
November 20, 2008 8:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto
November 20, 2008 9:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Basically I have always seen Barack Obama as a disaster for progressive politics, just as Tony Blair has always been. Mind you, I think Obama is more intelligent than Blair. However, I am not as sure that he is as effective an administrator as Blair is/was. However, it seems to me his role, like Blair is to defuse and to neutralize the left.
Let me say, (tongue in cheek), that George Bush caused thousands of people to read Noam Chomsky that never would have read him otherwise. So I could say, (in complete seriousness) that the Bush years have helped raise people's consciousness. In my opinion that is the really important thing, changing consciousness.
Much of the political energy that Bush produced has been funneled off into "yes we canning" and I'm afraid that in the end will have as little to show for it as the post-Thatcher Brits have to show for the Blair years.
November 20, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink