Intensifying the Hunt Against Somali Pirates - By Mike Nizza

Pirates operating off the coast of Somalia haven’t caused so much havoc by simply being ruthless. Their innovative tactics have enabled them to launch attacks farther out on the high seas than small skiffs should be able to go, and then they evade pursuers by floating closer to the shore, where international patrols can’t follow without permission from Somalia’s embattled government.
Today, signs emerged that both abilities were threatened by diplomatic and military coalitions looking to stop a startling spike in attacks this year.
First, the International Maritime Organization — the United Nations authority on international waters — urged Somalia to grant a blanket consent for any members of an American-led military coalition to pursue pirates into its waters.
In comments to The Daily Telegraph of London, Keith Winstanley, a British Navy commander helping lead the coalition, tied the urgent need to terrorism:
While vast sums of money are involved — ransoms can exceed £500,000 — Cdre Winstanley said that official concern had been expressed over intelligence reports that little of the money filtered down to the Somali regions.
“Piracy and terrorism is a difficult picture to build,” he said. “The extent of money diverted to terrorism is not known, but I don’t see evidence that the money is going into houses, schools and jobs onshore.”
But humanitarian needs are also dire, with pirates hijacking aid shipments. United Nations officials estimate that Somalia “higher malnutrition rates, more current bloodshed and fewer aid workers than Darfur,” The New York Times reported on November 20.
A day before, the French Navy escorted a huge shipment of food from the World Food Program. But that mission was expected to last two months, leaving Josette Sheeran, the W.F.P.’s chief, hoping that “other nations will urgently step up and follow the French example,” according to Reuters.
On the military end of the equation, the American-led coalition have set off on a hunt for the pirate “mother ships,” rather than just the small skiffs that are used to sneak up on targets. The United States Navy recently sank two skiffs that were used to hijack a Japanese tanker off Somalia, but they didn’t make the trip from the shore on their own.
An Associated Press report from aboard the Babur, a Pakistani Navy vessel engaged in the antipiracy battle, explains why:
The Japanese vessel had been attacked some 85 nautical miles from Somalia in the busy lanes used by boats entering the Suez canal — too far for the two small boats carrying pirates to have come from shore. Some attacks are even further from land, as far as 250 nautical miles, [Commodore Khan Hasham of Pakistan] said.
The mother ships are starting to sound like Moby Dick — they’ve been seen by numerous private captains, but never by the international patrol. An expert interview by The A.P. had one possible explanation:
Andrew Mwangura, head of the Kenya-based East Africa Seafarers’ Assistance Program, says the mother ships melt into the ordinary shipping traffic without notice once they have disgorged their deadly packs of speedboats. Coalition warships have frequently passed a mother ship, he says, without even realizing.
The mother ships don’t carry weapons, he says, preferring to arm two or three smaller boats with antitank missiles, machine guns and rocket propelled grenades. They leave the small boats at sea, possibly with another vessel loaded with fuel. When a merchant ship comes into view, the small, fast boats attack as a pack.
Mother ships “are among the fishing vessels,” Mwangura said. “They won’t find it until there are no fishing vessels in Somali waters.”
Asked about the fruitless hunt so far, Commander Robert D. Katz of the USS Stout blamed the lack of access to Somali waters. Which brings us back to the International Maritime Organization’s urgent message to Somalia today. So far, there has been no reply.

Source: New York Times