Indian Navy Anti-Piracy Efforts

[Imran Khan]

India denies deploying 4 more ships to curb piracy

NEW DELHI: India on Saturday denied reports of four more Indian Navy warships setting sail for the pirate-infested waters around Somalia in the Gulf of Aden. The Indian Defence Ministry has been questioning the navy’s top brass about orders to INS Tabar to destroy a pirate ‘mother ship’ earlier this week. Ministry officials felt that the navy exceeded its mandate for deployment in the area, which entails ensuring secure movement of Indian ships. The clash between naval bosses and the Defence Ministry was ultimately halted after 12 hours of the incident, when the Prime Minister’s office and Defence Minister AK Antony’s intervened. iftikhar gilani

 

[nitesh]

Hope our political leadership gives more free hand to our armed forces:

The Hindu : Opinion / News Analysis : Indian Navy comes of age

Indian Navy comes of age

Sreeram Chaulia

The fact that piracy is viewed as a global evil that needs to be jointly combated provides respectability to the forthright measures of the Indian Navy.


WELCOME DEVELOPMENTS: The sinking of a pirate ship and the shooing away of its two ancillary units by INS Tabar speak volumes about the skill and tenacity of the Indian Navy.

The sinking of a pirate ‘mother ship’ by the Indian naval stealth frigate, INS Tabar, off the coast of Oman has suddenly shone a ray of hope on the seemingly intractable crisis of a hijacking spree near the Horn of Africa. As the volume and scale of piracy has shot up over the last year, especially along the Somalia-Yemen-Oman waters, victim companies and their respective governments were in a major quandary about the appropriate response.

Most tellingly, the world’s strongest navy — that of the United States — had recently expressed helplessness and shock when pirates daringly scrambled aboard and seized a Saudi ‘supertanker,’ thrice as large as an aircraft carrier, that was transporting crude oil worth $100 million. The American navy had been red facedly explaining that it is “hard to stop the pirates” and that its warships could “do nothing” unless they were within 10 minutes distance from a potential hijacking event.

India dispatched the Russian-equipped {nitesh: It should have been written russian made} INS Tabar for anti-piracy surveillance and patrolling on November 2 and it had already been involved in action on November 11 in preventing armed pirates from capturing an Indian and a Saudi vessel. The robustness and alacrity with which Indian marine commandos sprung into mission mode contrasted with the overcautious and clueless attitude of other international naval forces who are currently participating in a joint endeavour to secure the safety of the vital sea lanes between Europe and Asia.

NATO’s Operation Allied Provider had deployed frigates from Italy, Britain and Greece for a while in the same littoral environs as INS Tabar, but the entire exercise was downplayed for fear of raising undue expectations of successfully rooting out the scourge of piracy. To boot, a brace of experts like Roger Middleton of Chatham House had been airing views that a posse of 20 or 25 naval warships would “definitely not spell the death knell of Somali piracy.”

The only comparable incident to that of the Indian naval strikes is a June 2008 interdiction of pirates in the Gulf of Aden by HMCS Calgary, the Canadian warship, whose helicopters drove away two small pirate boats from preying upon merchant shipping. However, the Canadian intervention did not result in the sinking of any pirate vessel, as the attackers swiftly redirected their skiffs back towards Somali territorial waters. India’s assertive naval interception of pirates and usage of guided missiles and cannons at the targets is in a different category altogether and sets an example for the other multinational navies which have been wringing their hands about the complexity of the challenge on their hands.

Incidentally, the decision to send INS Tabar to the Gulf of Aden had been arrived at by the Government of India after eight months of deliberation during which the navy left no stone unturned in convincing the nation’s political leadership that the move would be in the interests of Indian-flagged merchant ships which frequent the route. Owing to past baggage, India has been reluctant to be seen internationally as an expansionist or aggressive naval power. Therefore, several considerations were weighed and taken into account by the country’s civilian establishment before giving the green signal to the navy.

The defensive language in which the sinking of the pirate mother vessel by INS Tabar was reported also reflects this cautious but pragmatic foray into ‘out of area’ waters far away from the Indian coast. According to the naval spokesperson, heavy gunfire was aimed at the pirate ship purely in “self-defence” after the pirates had issued threatening calls and initiated the hostilities. The description of the enemy vessel’s upper deck as being loaded with gun-toting and RPG-brandishing pirates was released by the navy to complete the picture of a responsible retaliation on thuggish criminals rather than a proactive or flashy adventure.

Given that the battle — which lasted four to five hours — transpired in international waters, India has no reason to be apologetic about its courageous and exemplary role in tackling one of the oldest crimes in history. In June 2008, a U.N. Security Council resolution with the consent of the beleaguered Somali government unanimously endorsed foreign navies to counter piracy even within Somalia’s territorial waters. The fact that piracy is viewed as a global evil that needs to be jointly combated thus provides respectability to forthright measures of the Indian navy.

In this context, it is worth recalling that piracy is considered a violation of jus cogens, the peremptory norm of international law from which no derogation is ever permitted. Along with slavery, torture and genocide, piracy has been outlawed through centuries of customary and codified international law as an intolerable offence that militates against the common good of humanity. If ever there was a foolproof legal backing for the use of military force for a noble cause, INS Tabar has hit the right notes by confronting the armed brigands who have sent shivers down the spine of the entire world comity. For once, painful sagas of detentions of sailors and payment of ransom were averted through quick and decisive blows.

For years now, Indian naval officers have been making the case for expansion from a ‘Brown Water’ coastal defence force into a ‘Blue Water’ entity that can project national power beyond 200 miles of the country’s shoreline. The need to match China’s energetic ‘string of pearls’ blueprint in the Indian Ocean and Asia-Pacific regions and to appraise the high seas from a strategic lens was not lost upon the brightest Indian naval planners.

Toshi Yoshihara and James Holmes have shown in a thoroughly researched volume, Chinese Naval Strategy in the 21st Century: the Turn to Mahan (2007), that Beijing’s geostrategic thought in the 21st century is informed by the concepts espoused by legendary American naval theorist, Alfred Mahan. Mahan believed that controlling seaborne commerce was the key to victory in war. India, whose economic and trading interests now stretch from the Middle East to the farther reaches of East Asia, is gradually waking up to this wisdom and trying to keep up with the Joneses by building up a ‘Mahanian’ navy.

The 2006 ‘Operation Sukoon’, in which advanced Indian missile frigates evacuated Indian nationals trapped by the war in Lebanon, was a sign of the maturing of this vision of a navy that can deploy with aplomb to the Far West and East, outside the Indian Ocean.

Seen in this backdrop, the sinking of a pirate ship and the shooing away of its two ancillary units by INS Tabar are welcome developments that speak volumes of the skill and tenacity of the Indian navy in defending national and, indeed, international interests. The navy’s own conviction is that the dream of a confident ‘Thalassocratic’ India is very much in the realm of feasibility, provided there is less dithering and more political will to open cheque books among civilian rulers in New Delhi. For a country nursing a deep desire to be recognised and respected as a power that does good in the world, there can be no sounder investment than in the Indian navy.

(Sreeram Chaulia is a researcher on international affairs at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs in Syracuse, New York.)

 

[nitesh]

LiveFist: Photos: INS Tabar pounds pirates!

The Indian Navy stealth frigate INS Tabar uses its A-190 100-mm canon to smash this pirate mothership to bits on the evening of 18 November, 385 nautical miles south-west of Salalah port in Oman. Congratulations to Capt Pradyut K Banerjee and the entire F44 crew! Shano Varun.

 

[gpit]

Sunken 'pirate ship' was actually Thai trawler, owner says

BANGKOK, Thailand (CNN) -- Fourteen sailors are still missing from a Thai trawler that was sunk last week by the Indian navy as a suspected pirate ship, the vessel's owner said Tuesday.

One crewman was found alive after six days adrift in the Gulf of Aden, and one is confirmed dead, said Wicharn Sirichaiekawat, owner of the Ekawat Nava 5.

Last week, India's navy reported that the frigate INS Tabar had battled a pirate "mother vessel" in the gulf November 18, leaving the ship ablaze and likely sunk. Wicharn said that vessel was his ship, which was in the process of being seized by pirates when it came under fire.

Indian authorities insisted that their ship had acted against a pirate vessel which had threatened to attack the Tabar.

"We fired in self-defense and in response to firing upon our vessel. It was a pirate vessel in the international waters and its stance was aggressive," Commodore Nirad Sinha, a navy spokesman, told CNN. He said the ship the Tabar fired upon was laden with ammunition.

Wicharn told reporters that the Ekawat Nava 5 was headed from Oman to Yemen to deliver fishing equipment when it was set upon by pirates off the Horn of Africa. The pirates were seizing control of the ship when the Tabar moved in, he said.

Wicharn said he learned the fate of his vessel from a Cambodian crew member who survived the gunfire and drifted in the ocean for six days before he was plucked to safety by a passing ship. The sailor was recovering in a hospital in Yemen, he said.

Wicharn said his ship made a distress call on November 18 as it was chased by pirates in two speedboats, but the connection was lost midway. The owners, Sirichai Fisheries, had not heard from the crew since then.

Later that evening, the Indian navy said it encountered a suspected pirate "mother vessel," with two speedboats in tow, about 285 nautical miles (525 km) southwest of the Omani port of Salalah. "Mother vessels" are often used as mobile bases to ferry pirates and smaller attack boats into deep water.

When the Tabar's crew hailed the ship and demanded it stop for inspection, the pirates threatened to destroy the Indian ship, the ministry reported.

"Pirates were seen roaming on the upper deck of this vessel with guns and rocket-propelled grenade launchers. The vessel continued its threatening calls and subsequently fired upon INS Tabar," the ministry said. The Indian frigate returned fire, setting the pirate ship ablaze and setting off explosions on board, the statement said.

An international fleet has been patrolling the waters off the Horn of Africa in an effort to crack down on pirates based in largely lawless Somalia. Map of piracy incidents in 2008 »

Pirates have attacked more than 90 vessels off East Africa so far this year, according to the International Maritime Bureau's Piracy Reporting Center, which monitors piracy around the world, including a Saudi supertanker captured earlier this month.

The latest ship seized was a Yemeni freighter Adina taken last week with a crew of seven on board, including two Yemenis, two Panamanians and three Somalis, security sources in Yemen told CNN.

The government is in direct contact with officials in Somalia to work on rescuing the ship, for which the hijackers are asking for a $2 million ransom.

While the pirate take over of the Saudi super-tanker highlights the dangers facing cargo ships navigating the Horn of Africa, marine security experts are warning that racing boats, private charters and luxury yachts can be far easier pirate targets -- rich people usually carry cash, and jewels. Watch the risks facing racers and luxury sailors »

And competitors in the world's biggest ocean race made an unprecedented change of course this year as organizers mandated yachts steer clear of Africa's east coast.


Sunken 'pirate ship' was actually Thai trawler, owner says - CNN.com

 

[gpit]

No offence, but I admire Indian medium multi-stage HI-INFI amplifiers, bottom-up and top-down.

When the Tabar's crew hailed the ship and demanded it stop for inspection, the pirates threatened to destroy the Indian ship, the ministry reported.

Unless those people are insane, how could they threaten to destroy a navy vessel like this?

File image of Indian navy frigate INS Tabar

 

[blain2]

Sunken 'pirate ship' was actually Thai trawler, owner says

BANGKOK, Thailand (CNN) -- Fourteen sailors are still missing from a Thai trawler that was sunk last week by the Indian navy as a suspected pirate ship, the vessel's owner said Tuesday.

One crewman was found alive after six days adrift in the Gulf of Aden, and one is confirmed dead, said Wicharn Sirichaiekawat, owner of the Ekawat Nava 5.

Sunken 'pirate ship' was actually Thai trawler, owner says - CNN.com

Now this is funny!

Goes to show how complex the situation is out there and then the Indian news media goes on a mighty offensive again putting down the poor old USN with comments like the following:

Most tellingly, the world’s strongest navy — that of the United States — had recently expressed helplessness and shock when pirates daringly scrambled aboard and seized a Saudi ‘supertanker,’ thrice as large as an aircraft carrier, that was transporting crude oil worth $100 million. The American navy had been red facedly explaining that it is “hard to stop the pirates” and that its warships could “do nothing” unless they were within 10 minutes distance from a potential hijacking event.

So after the USN expresses it "helplessness" and "shock", the IN goes in to teach these USN bums a thing or two by taking out a Thai trawler...nice! ..got to give credit to the Indian media for all the brouhaha around the destruction of the fishing trawler.

 

[Chanakya.10]

Now this is funny!

Goes to show how complex the situation is out there and then the Indian news media goes on a mighty offensive again putting down the poor old USN with comments like the following:



So after the USN expresses it "helplessness" and "shock", the IN goes in to teach these USN bums a thing or two by taking out a Thai trawler...nice! ..got to give credit to the Indian media for all the brouhaha around the destruction of the fishing trawler.

That ship was hijacked by the pirates. They fired shots, so it was obvious that INS Tabar will retaliate. No need to get too excited about it.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

That ship was hijacked by the pirates. They fired shots, so it was obvious that INS Tabar will retaliate. No need to get too excited about it.

excited?
ask the indian media and bharatchaka fanboys who are over excited about IN destroying pirates mothership.

as usual indian side claming victory way too early like in the past.. now facts are coming out that it was no more then a poor thai fishing boat. shame on the indians.. they over reacted the setuation by destroying the wrong target.

 

[blain2]

That ship was hijacked by the pirates. They fired shots, so it was obvious that INS Tabar will retaliate. No need to get too excited about it.

Who shot whom first is what is in dispute now Mr. Chanakya. The owner of the trawler is saying they had nothing to do with firing anything.

I am surely not the one who is all too excited. I think Indians in general were gloating over this as another indication of India coming of age. Look above and you will see the excitement and euphoria.

 

[Myth_buster_1]

FACTS
- It was a Thai fishing boat
- the fishing boat was under attack by the pirates when it got destroyed by the indians.
- only in indian story was this fishing boat claimed to be a "mothership". losers...
- NO AMMO WAS IN THE FISHING BOAT!
- 2-3 survivor crews have been found and rest are missing.

now these losers fake battle encounter champions are justifing the sinking of the boat by saying that the freaking 4,000 tonne frigate was under fire by ak-47s and had to defend its self... lol

RIP to the lost ones..

 

[Flintlock]

excited?
ask the indian media and bharatchaka fanboys who are over excited about IN destroying pirates mothership.

as usual indian side claming victory way too early like in the past.. now facts are coming out that it was no more then a poor thai fishing boat. shame on the indians.. they over reacted the setuation by destroying the wrong target.

They didn't overreact, they fired back when fired at - standard procedure.

Firstly, its not possible to decide whether a ship is a pirate vessel or not by looking at it, because pirate vessels are not in any way unique nor do they have the word "Pirate Vessel" written on them.

Secondly, the trawler did not send out a distress signal because the transmission failed, so if the Indian ship had received a distress signal from the trawler, they could have acted differently.

So considering these factors, the conclusion they would have obviously come to is that the ship was a pirate vessel.

 

[Flintlock]

Who shot whom first is what is in dispute now Mr. Chanakya. The owner of the trawler is saying they had nothing to do with firing anything.

I am surely not the one who is all too excited. I think Indians in general were gloating over this as another indication of India coming of age. Look above and you will see the excitement and euphoria.

Erm, the owner of the trawler said that his ship was hijacked.

Also, this doesn't really change anything. The big story isn't the sinking of the ship (that was simply being in the right - or in this case the wrong - place at the right time) because pirate ship or not, a ship of that size cannot threaten a frigate unless the frigate refuses to retaliate - the big story is that the Navy Ship was patrolling the area, and the Indian Navy has the capability to do so.

 

[ejaz007]

Erm, the owner of the trawler said that his ship was hijacked.

Also, this doesn't really change anything. The big story isn't the sinking of the ship (that was simply being in the right - or in this case the wrong - place at the right time) because pirate ship or not, a ship of that size cannot threaten a frigate unless the frigate refuses to retaliate - the big story is that the Navy Ship was patrolling the area, and the Indian Navy has the capability to do so.

Is Indian Navy mandated by the UN. As far as I can see it is illegal and against the norms of the UN charter to go to a third country and start using force.

The best IN can do is sink a fishing trawler that was a threat to fully armed frigate. Do care to explain how AK-47's can sink a frigate.

A number of countries have the same capability but prefer the legal way.

 

[ejaz007]

Pakistan offers naval support for anti-piracy campaign

UNITED NATIONS: Pakistan has offered to provide naval support to the international anti-piracy campaign off the Somalian coast, provided the United Nations (UN) Security Council lays down a clear mandate.

According to a press release, the offer was made by Pakistan's UN Ambassador Abdullah Husain Haroon during a meeting with the visiting Belgian Defence Minister, Pieter de Crem, on Monday during which the increased incidents of piracy in the Molluca Straits, the Red Sea and the Somalian Coast were discussed. The ambassador also discussed UN peacekeeping operations and the problems faced by troop contributing countries.

While offering Pakistan’s naval assistance, Ambassador Haroon said that the government would consider taking a lead role under some conditions: to press into service UN-permitted Pakistan Air Force support missions in the region from bases in the Arabian peninsula as well as financial arrangements, provision of technology, weaponry to its personnel, who would serve under their own senior naval commander. He told the Belgian minister about some problems caused by long tours of duty of UN peacekeepers, especially in Africa where conflicts were increasing and becoming more risky, as well as lack senior officers in the field missions and difficulties of co-ordination and co-operation among different segments. app

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan

 

[Flintlock]

Is Indian Navy mandated by the UN. As far as I can see it is illegal and against the norms of the UN charter to go to a third country and start using force.

The best IN can do is sink a fishing trawler that was a threat to fully armed frigate. Do care to explain how AK-47's can sink a frigate.

A number of countries have the same capability but prefer the legal way.

The Somalian authorities have given permission to the Indian Navy to patrol within their territorial waters.

Also, this incident occurred in international waters so yes - its perfectly legal.

The pirates were armed with rocket launchers, which could have hit the Indian ship if it was within range.
Also, the possibility was always there that the pirates would attempt to hijack the frigate.

As I said, the Indian ship was fired at, so it had no choice but to retaliate. It would be an act of utter foolishness to simply stand and wait while the frigate is being fired at.