Couple kidnapped by pirates - no help from the UK government?

[Steve-O]

Are the government really prepared to sit back and watch 2 of it's citizens be killed?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/8371446.stm

I understand their position but surely SOMETHING can be done??

[Toaods]

were they not in open waters?

everyone for themselves out there.

Must be nuts anyway..it's well known that's a life(not) in your hands zone.

[Steve-O]

were they not in open waters?

everyone for themselves out there.

Must be nuts anyway..it's well known that's a life(not) in your hands zone.

'International waters' apparently.

I think you should be able to go sailing without being kidnapped by pirates, and when said pirates actively seek money from your government then the government of somewhere like the UK should be expected to do a bit more than say "nah, sorry".

[Ants]

'International waters' apparently.

I think you should be able to go sailing without being kidnapped by pirates, and when said pirates actively seek money from your government then the government of somewhere like the UK should be expected to do a bit more than say "nah, sorry".

Yeh, how about KABOOOOOOOM.

Someone has got to be the sacrificial lamb, blow up the pirates, make an example of them and then lets see who wants to kidnap British citizens next?

If only it was that simples ????

[Beefster]

'International waters' apparently.

I think you should be able to go sailing without being kidnapped by pirates, and when said pirates actively seek money from your government then the government of somewhere like the UK should be expected to do a bit more than say "nah, sorry".

If the UK Government was to start paying millions of pounds in ransom every time a citizen was kidnapped, no UK citizen would ever be safe. Sometimes you just can't expect your state to step in and make everything okay.

Although, in saying that, a 'coalition' of nations need to send some military to deal with the pirates and sort the overall problem.

[Twa Cairpets]

'International waters' apparently.

I think you should be able to go sailing without being kidnapped by pirates, and when said pirates actively seek money from your government then the government of somewhere like the UK should be expected to do a bit more than say "nah, sorry".

I feel sorry for the individuals, but Im behind the government on this one. if the government were actively promoting the Somalian coast as a tourist destination, then maybe there would be justification, but its not as if anyone wouldnt know this area to be a high risk zone.

Without knowing the full facts of the case other than as it is reported on the news, my initial thought is that there was something of a dereliction of personal responsibility by the couple.

[hibsbollah]

I have no sympathy for the pirates at all. It would be a different matter if they wore eye patches, spoke in suspiciously west country accents and described non-pirates as 'landlubbers'.

[Betty Boop]

Sources:
Al Jazeera English, October 11, 2008
Title: “Toxic waste behind Somali piracy”
Author: Najad Abdullahi

Huffington Post, January 4, 2009
Title: “You are being lied to about pirates”
Author: Johann Hari

WardheerNews, January 8, 2009
Title: “The Two Piracies in Somalia: Why the World Ignores the Other”
Author: Mohamed Abshir Waldo

Student Researcher: Christine Wilson
Faculty Evaluator: Andre Bailey, EOP Advisor
Sonoma State University

The international community has come out in force to condemn and declare war on the Somali fishermen pirates, while discreetly protecting the illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fleets from around the world that have been poaching and dumping toxic waste in Somali waters since the fall of the Somali government eighteen years ago.

In 1991, when the government of Somalia collapsed, foreign interests seized the opportunity to begin looting the country’s food supply and using the country’s unguarded waters as a dumping ground for nuclear and other toxic waste.

According to the High Seas Task Force (HSTF), there were over 800 IUU fishing vessels in Somali waters at one time in 2005, taking advantage of Somalia’s inability to police and control its own waters and fishing grounds. The IUUs poach an estimated $450 million in seafood from Somali waters annually. In so doing, they steal an invaluable protein source from some of the world’s poorest people and ruin the livelihoods of legitimate fishermen.

Allegations of the dumping of toxic waste, as well as illegal fishing, have circulated since the early 1990s, but hard evidence emerged when the tsunami of 2004 hit the country. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) reported that the tsunami washed rusting containers of toxic waste onto the shores of Puntland, northern Somalia.

Nick Nuttall, a UNEP spokesman, told Al Jazeera that when the barrels were smashed open by the force of the waves, the containers exposed a “frightening activity” that had been going on for more than a decade. “Somalia has been used as a dumping ground for hazardous waste starting in the early 1990s, and continuing through the civil war there,” he said. “The waste is many different kinds. There is uranium radioactive waste. There is lead, and heavy metals like cadmium and mercury. There is also industrial waste, and there are hospital wastes, chemical wastes—you name it.”

Nuttall also said that since the containers came ashore, hundreds of residents have fallen ill, suffering from mouth and abdominal bleeding, skin infections and other ailments. “What is most alarming here is that nuclear waste is being dumped. Radioactive uranium waste that is potentially killing Somalis and completely destroying the ocean,” he said.

Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy for Somalia, says the practice helps fuel the eighteen-year-old civil war in Somalia, as companies pay Somali government ministers and/or militia leaders to dump their waste. “There is no government control . . . and there are few people with high moral ground . . . yes, people in high positions are being paid off, but because of the fragility of the Transitional Federal Government, some of these companies now no longer ask the authorities—they simply dump their waste and leave.”
In 1992 the countries of the European Union and 168 other countries signed the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal. The convention prohibits waste trade between countries that have signed, as well as countries that have not signed the accord, unless a bilateral agreement had been negotiated. It also prohibits the shipping of hazardous waste to a war zone.

Surprisingly, the UN has disregarded its own findings, and has ignored Somali and international appeals to act on the continued ravaging of the Somali marine resources and dumping of toxic wastes. Violations have also been largely ignored by the region’s maritime authorities.

This is the context from which the men we are calling “pirates” have emerged.

Everyone agrees they were ordinary Somali fishermen who, at first, took speedboats to try to dissuade the dumpers and trawlers, or at least wage a “tax” on them. They call themselves the Volunteer Coast Guard of Somalia.

One of the pirate leaders, Sugule Ali, explains that their motive is “to stop illegal fishing and dumping in our waters. . . . We don’t consider ourselves sea bandits. We consider sea bandits [to be] those who illegally fish, and dump waste, and carry weapons in our seas.”

Author Johann Hari notes that, while none of this makes hostage-taking justifiable, the “pirates” have the overwhelming support of the local population for a reason. The independent Somalia news site WardherNews conducted the best research we have on what ordinary Somalis are thinking. It found that 70 percent “strongly support the piracy as a form of national defense of the country’s territorial waters.”

Instead of taking action to protect the people and waters of Somalia from international transgressions, the UN has responded to the situation by passing aggressive resolutions that entitle and encourage transgressors to wage war on the Somali pirates.

A chorus of calls for tougher international action has resulted in multi-national and unilateral Naval stampede to invade and take control of the Somali waters. The UN Security Council (a number of whose members may have ulterior motives to indirectly protect their illegal fishing fleets in the Somali Seas) passed Resolutions 1816 in June 2008, and 1838 in October 2008, which “call upon States interested in the security of maritime activities to take part actively in the fight against piracy on the high seas off the coast of Somalia, in particular by deploying naval vessels and military aircraft . . .”
Both NATO and the EU have issued orders to the same effect. Russia, Japan, India, Malaysia, Egypt, and Yemen, along with an increasing number of countries have joined the fray.
For years, attempts made to address piracy in the world’s seas through UN resolutions have failed to pass, largely because member nations felt such resolutions would infringe on their sovereignty and security. Countries are unwilling to give up control and patrol of their own waters. UN Resolutions 1816 and 1838, to which a number of West African, Caribbean and South American nations objected, were accordingly tailored to apply to Somalia only. Somalia has no representation at the United Nations strong enough to demand amendments to protect its sovereignty, and Somali civil society objections to the Draft Resolutions—which makes no mention of illegal fishing or hazard waste dumping—were ignored. 


Hari asks, “Do we expect starving Somalians to stand passively on their beaches, paddling in our nuclear waste, and watch us snatch their fish to eat in restaurants in London and Paris and Rome? We didn’t act on those crimes—but when some of the fishermen responded by disrupting the transit-corridor for 20 percent of the world’s oil supply, we begin to shriek about “evil.” If we really want to deal with piracy, we need to stop its root cause—our crimes —before we send in the gun-boats to root out Somalia’s criminals.”

Update by Mohamed Abshir Waldo
The crises of the multiple piracies in Somalia have not diminished since my previous article, “The Two Piracies in Somalia: Why the Word Ignores the Other,” was written in December 2008. All the illegal fishing piracy, the waste dumping piracy and the shipping piracy continue with new zeal. Somali fishermen, turned pirates in reaction to armed foreign marine poachers, have intensified their war against all kinds of ships in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean.

On international response, foreign governments, international organizations and mainstream media have been united in demonizing Somalia and described its fishermen as evil men pillaging ships and terrorizing sailors (even though no sailors were harmed). This presentation is lopsided. The media said relatively little on the other piracies of illegal fishing and waste dumping.
The allied navies of the world—fleets of over forty warships from over ten Asian, Arab, and African countries as well as from many NATO and EU member countries—stepped up their hunt for the Somali fishermen pirates, regardless of whether they are actually engaged in piracy or in normal fishing in the Somali waters. Various meetings of the International Contact Group for Somalia (ICGS) in New York, London, Cairo, and Rome continue to underline the demonization of the Somali fishermen and urge further punitive actions without a single mention of the violation of illegal fishing and toxic dumping by vessels from the countries of those sitting in the ICGS and UN forums in judgment of the piracy issue.

At the ICGS Anti-Piracy meeting in Cairo on May 30 2009, Egypt and Italy were two of the loudest countries calling for severe punishment of the Somali fishermen pirates. As the ICGS are meeting in Rome today (June 10, 2009), two Egyptian trawlers full of fish illegally caught in Somali waters and an Italian barge that had been towing two huge tanks suspected of containing toxic or nuclear waste are being held in the Somali coastal town of Las Khorey by the local community, who invited the international experts to come and investigate these cases. So far, the international community has not responded to the Las Khorey community’s invitation.

It should be pointed out that both the IUUs and waste dumping are happening in other African countries. Ivory Coast is a victim of major international toxic dumping.
It is said that acts of piracy are actually acts of desperation, and, as in the case of Somalia, what is one man’s pirate is another man’s Coast Guard.

[ArabHibee]

I'm sure I read somewhere that a British Navy ship was very near when all this happened and had to sit and watch it unfold as they could not intervene? :confused:

[steakbake]

I'm sure I read somewhere that a British Navy ship was very near when all this happened and had to sit and watch it unfold as they could not intervene? :confused:

The navy. Always first to put themselves in harm's way.

[marinello59]

I'm sure I read somewhere that a British Navy ship was very near when all this happened and had to sit and watch it unfold as they could not intervene? :confused:


The navy. Always first to put themselves in harm's way.

It was an RFA ship which is basically a Merchant Ship with defence capabilities only. Any attempt at intervention there would have put the couple at even more risk.

[steakbake]

It was an RFA ship which is basically a Merchant Ship with defence capabilities only. Any attempt at intervention there would have put the couple at even more risk.

I was just messing.

As callous as it sounds, I suspect the government has their hands tied - if you pay out to free them, it makes all people potentially lucrative targets. Word travels fast and people can do unlikely things if they think that kidnapping a British national might bring their community some scarce cash/weapons/food.

[marinello59]

I was just messing.

As callous as it sounds, I suspect the government has their hands tied - if you pay out to free them, it makes all people potentially lucrative targets. Word travels fast and people can do unlikely things if they think that kidnapping a British national might bring their community some scarce cash/weapons/food.

That doesn't sound callous, it's a fair summation.

[Jack]

Sympathies all round here.

I was aware of the stuff posted by Ms Boop and it would appear the Somalis are well and truly being shafted by foreign fishermen and dumpers. My thoughts would be though why don’t they do more of the hijacking of these fishermen and dumpers instead of oil tankers and daft yacht people.

Its not nice to be in a position where you're captured and your life is at risk as the Chandler’s are but just how stupid do you have to be to ignore all the information that’s available and sail in to well publicised pirate territory? Sailing forums, like this Hibs forum, have been banging on about how dangerous it is, about how many folk have had close calls and even the Chandler’s mentioned it before they got captured.

I think most British travellers also know that its not the job of the UK Government to ‘bail’ folk out of sticky situations when abroad. They do try and help though. I see no reason why the UK Government should be seen as the bad guys here for not shelling out a ransom.

Right, that’s the PC version! :rolleyes:

[Betty Boop]

I was just messing.

As callous as it sounds, I suspect the government has their hands tied - if you pay out to free them, it makes all people potentially lucrative targets. Word travels fast and people can do unlikely things if they think that kidnapping a British national might bring their community some scarce cash/weapons/food.

Their hands were tied with the cases of Ken Bigley and the five British guys taken hostage from the Finance Ministry in Iraq in 2007. (four of them dead IIRC) The governments line is, 'that they do not do deals with hostage takers', whereas other governments cough up the ransom fees, France and Italy having done so recently.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Thanks to Betty Boop for the post. Very interesting and just goes to show there is always two sides to a story.

Having said that the ' Pirates' will be shooting themselves in the foot if anything happens to this couple for the following reason.

Nobody gets too bent out of shape if Tankers and the like get highjacked coz I would suspect that any operator going through Somali waters knows the score and the money which actually changes hands at the end is small change to the likes of Shell or Exxon etc etc ( £3,000,000 or so on average I am lead to believe ) so to a certain extent public opinion isnt a factor.

But in this case we are not talking about some multi national corporation, we are talking about a couple of defenseless pensioners who sold everything to fulfill a dream.

If the so called Pirates harm them, then any moral high ground they might have been able to claim as justification for their actions would be redundant and they would just be shown to be a bunch of thugs with no regard for human life and would deserve the visit they will get from the SAS or whoever decides enough is enough.

There are better ways to promote a cause or highlight an injustice than to murder pensioners. And unfortunately no government with an ounce of sanity can afford to cave in to this type of thing by paying up. Where would it end.

On a separate but connected note. No matter how poor a country and no matter what part of the world, or what the cause, there always seems to be plenty of money for bloody guns and missiles.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Thanks to Betty Boop for the post. Very interesting and just goes to show there is always two sides to a story.

Having said that the ' Pirates' will be shooting themselves in the foot if anything happens to this couple for the following reason.

Nobody gets too bent out of shape if Tankers and the like get highjacked coz I would suspect that any operator going through Somali waters knows the score and the money which actually changes hands at the end is small change to the likes of Shell or Exxon etc etc ( £3,000,000 or so on average I am lead to believe ) so to a certain extent public opinion isnt a factor.

But in this case we are not talking about some multi national corporation, we are talking about a couple of defenseless pensioners who sold everything to fulfill a dream.

If the so called Pirates harm them, then any moral high ground they might have been able to claim as justification for their actions would be redundant and they would just be shown to be a bunch of thugs with no regard for human life and would deserve the visit they will get from the SAS or whoever decides enough is enough.

There are better ways to promote a cause or highlight an injustice than to murder pensioners. And unfortunately no government with an ounce of sanity can afford to cave in to this type of thing by paying up. Where would it end.

On a separate but connected note. No matter how poor a country and no matter what part of the world, or what the cause, there always seems to be plenty of money for bloody guns and missiles.

I don't think the pirates give a toss what anyone thinks, let alone people sitting thousands of miles away.

[Killiehibbie]

Sympathies all round here.

I was aware of the stuff posted by Ms Boop and it would appear the Somalis are well and truly being shafted by foreign fishermen and dumpers. My thoughts would be though why don’t they do more of the hijacking of these fishermen and dumpers instead of oil tankers and daft yacht people.

Its not nice to be in a position where you're captured and your life is at risk as the Chandler’s are but just how stupid do you have to be to ignore all the information that’s available and sail in to well publicised pirate territory? Sailing forums, like this Hibs forum, have been banging on about how dangerous it is, about how many folk have had close calls and even the Chandler’s mentioned it before they got captured.

I think most British travellers also know that its not the job of the UK Government to ‘bail’ folk out of sticky situations when abroad. They do try and help though. I see no reason why the UK Government should be seen as the bad guys here for not shelling out a ransom.

Right, that’s the PC version! :rolleyes:

They wont target the dumpers as they might be armed and prepared to shoot them.

[J-C]

The UK gpovernment do not negotiate with kidnappers and terrorists, saying that what the hell were they doing sailing in waters where they were probably told were dangerous. It's like having a wee stroll through the streets of Kabul and moaning about people shooting at you and setting off bombs near you.

[steakbake]

They wont target the dumpers as they might be armed and prepared to shoot them.

I find it hard to believe the Somali pirates are some kind of latter day green campaigners concerned about the ecological fate of their seas.

We should absolutely read things that other news sources say, like Al Jazeera, but it is just as susceptible to the exaggeration, political spin and ulterior motives you get with BBC/CNN.

[Betty Boop]

The UK gpovernment do not negotiate with kidnappers and terrorists, saying that what the hell were they doing sailing in waters where they were probably told were dangerous. It's like having a wee stroll through the streets of Kabul and moaning about people shooting at you and setting off bombs near you.

Don't know how true that bit is? From what I have read, Britain and the Americans are currently negotiating with, and paying the Taliban to switch sides (not that I would call them terrorists). The UK government also negotiated with the IRA, some of who are now members of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

[marinello59]

Don't know how true that bit is? From what I have read, Britain and the Americans are currently negotiating with, and paying the Taliban to switch sides (not that I would call them terrorists). The UK government also negotiated with the IRA, some of who are now members of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

The UK Government doesn't pay ransoms though. In any situation. UK owned companies on the other hand...............

[steakbake]

Don't know how true that bit is? From what I have read, Britain and the Americans are currently negotiating with, and paying the Taliban to switch sides (not that I would call them terrorists). The UK government also negotiated with the IRA, some of who are now members of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Logic says you have to negotiate with terrorists. You cannot beat terrorists with a conventional army or with conventional methods. If anyone can come up with a concrete example of this happening, please let me know and I'll give you a tenner.

Kidnappers are different from terrorists. I think the Taliban are more a collection of bands of mercenaries and many of them who haven't joined up for the fundamentalist/belief aspect of it might find their loyalties tested if given the right kind of offer and conditions.

[Jack]

I find it hard to believe the Somali pirates are some kind of latter day green campaigners concerned about the ecological fate of their seas.

We should absolutely read things that other news sources say, like Al Jazeera, but it is just as susceptible to the exaggeration, political spin and ulterior motives you get with BBC/CNN.

I've read that from a few sources. While I doubt, like you, its for the sake of the planet if someone keeps nicking and poisoning their livelihood in a lawless country they are going to take the law into their own hands.

[--------]

I find it hard to believe the Somali pirates are some kind of latter day green campaigners concerned about the ecological fate of their seas.

We should absolutely read things that other news sources say, like Al Jazeera, but it is just as susceptible to the exaggeration, political spin and ulterior motives you get with BBC/CNN.


Probably not - probably they're more concerned that the fish-stocks are declining and they're finding it harder and harder to feed their families.

One man's pirate's another man's coastguard.

[marinello59]

I've read that from a few sources. While I doubt, like you, its for the sake of the planet if someone keeps nicking and poisoning their livelihood in a lawless country they are going to take the law into their own hands.

Pirates have been a threat to British Merchant ships for decades, the difference here is we are actually hearing about it. West Africa (and Nigerian waters in particular) have long been a problem. I can remember deck watches being kept when we were anchored of certain East African ports in the late seventies because there was a problem with this.

The article that Betty Boop has posted (and it even says that there is no justification for the piracy) may provide some background but when they are demanding millions in ransoms I would suggest that the main motivation is personal gain.

[marinello59]

Probably not - probably they're more concerned that the fish-stocks are declining and they're finding it harder and harder to feed their families.

One man's pirate's another man's coastguard.

Let's hope they don't start getting ideas up in Peterhead.:greengrin

[Petrie's Tache]

Let's hope they don't start getting ideas up in Peterhead.:greengrin

Thir fer twa bisy wi ra fash an ah rat!

[Hibrandenburg]

When you take innocent (even stupid) people hostage and threaten to kill them if you don't get the cash you demand, then you're nothing but a low life kidnapper no matter how you dress it up.

When these criminals get caught, they should be made to walk the plank in shark infested waters.

[Killiehibbie]

I find it hard to believe the Somali pirates are some kind of latter day green campaigners concerned about the ecological fate of their seas.

We should absolutely read things that other news sources say, like Al Jazeera, but it is just as susceptible to the exaggeration, political spin and ulterior motives you get with BBC/CNN.

I don't think for a minute they are concerned about anything other trying to get money from easy targets. If they thought you would shoot at them they'd probably wait on the next easier target.

[Ed De Gramo]

Lets be honest...

Pirates they are not...am I not right in thinking that some of them are only about 10 or 11?

Send in a specialist team...neutralise the flunts and rescue the hostages :greengrin

[Woody1985]

How are the pirates distributing this new found wealth?

Are they concerned about fish stocks and buying in food from other parties to distribute to people they feel are affected by the pollution etc?

I suspect it is the case that they do this for personal gain. If not, and they are feeding tens/hundreds of thousands of people with the money then fair play to them.

[HibsMax]

Haven't read the whole thread but while I don't expect the government, any government actually, to pay a ransom I would like to think they are doing something to help out. Who knows what is going on behind the scenes though? It wouldn't be prudent of the govt to say if they were doing something in secret.

[Woody1985]

Betty, any further information on the questions I raised?

Understandably, the areas where you get information are always from the slant of the victim. The above is almost excusing the pirates behaviour. The information tends to be as equally as biased as the press that paints the 'big bad pirate' message.

There is no middle ground and it would seem that some of the sources fail to acknowledge that some of these people are just money hungry *******s.

As I understand, the pirates tend to treat their victims fairly well but that's probably more out of self preservation i.e. if they start killing hostages then no one is ever going to pay up.

If these people are sticking up for their country and their people then I can understand.

[Jack]

Betty, any further information on the questions I raised?

Understandably, the areas where you get information are always from the slant of the victim. The above is almost excusing the pirates behaviour. The information tends to be as equally as biased as the press that paints the 'big bad pirate' message.

There is no middle ground and it would seem that some of the sources fail to acknowledge that some of these people are just money hungry *******s.

As I understand, the pirates tend to treat their victims fairly well but that's probably more out of self preservation i.e. if they start killing hostages then no one is ever going to pay up.

If these people are sticking up for their country and their people then I can understand.

As I understand it, it all started with notions of fairness and highlighting their plight.

As has been suggested once the big money came in the motives have probably swung considerably to the money grabbing bas***** to the detriment of the original cause.

[Woody1985]

As I understand it, it all started with notions of fairness and highlighting their plight.

As has been suggested once the big money came in the motives have probably swung considerably to the money grabbing bas***** to the detriment of the original cause.

Admirable to start with but shows what money and power can do (as it does in the west).

So are the people of the country actually a lot worse off now? Their seas still being polluted (is this still going on?) and are people unable to deliver aid due to the threat of kidnap?

[Lucius Apuleius]

Mr Marinello touched on it and said the same thing in a different way. Whilst I cannot disagree with Betty about what is happening, piracy off the coast of Somalia is not a new occurrence in the last 18 years. It has gone on for decades. It has worsened for sure but it has always been there. I don't think the dumping would be justification for boarding yachts etc anyway but probably being used as an excuse. Most of Nigeria has now declared piracy and kidnapping punishable by death. The thing about Nigeria though is that if the locals stop you from kidnapping someone then the death penalty is pretty superfluous anyhoo!!!!

Obviously I have seen my fair share of deck watches to avert pirate attacks over the years but they have funny moments as well. Especially if you are anchored somewhere waiting to dock and you find it is a bum boat full of local ladies tring to climb up your anchor chain as opposed to bad boys :greengrin

[Betty Boop]

Betty, any further information on the questions I raised?

Understandably, the areas where you get information are always from the slant of the victim. The above is almost excusing the pirates behaviour. The information tends to be as equally as biased as the press that paints the 'big bad pirate' message.

There is no middle ground and it would seem that some of the sources fail to acknowledge that some of these people are just money hungry *******s.

As I understand, the pirates tend to treat their victims fairly well but that's probably more out of self preservation i.e. if they start killing hostages then no one is ever going to pay up.

If these people are sticking up for their country and their people then I can understand.

Why don't you do your own reading then? :greengrin As Somalia is a lawless failed State,(remember Blackhawk Down? :greengrin) I would imagine that it is very difficult to get information about the redistribution of wealth. Any how here is the BBC's take on the money trail, is that unbiased enough for you? :grr:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8061535.stm