Opening address by IMO Secretary-General, Koji Sekimizu, Image: IMO

Maritime Safety Committee (MSC), 90th session, 16 to 25 May 2012 (High-level segment on arms on board)

Opening address by IMO Secretary-General Koji Sekimizu

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Excellencies, distinguished delegates,

As I mentioned in my opening remarks to the meeting, this is the first ever high-level segment of the Committee and its importance is underscored by the presence here today of the President of the Assembly and the Council Chairman.  I am particularly pleased to welcome and receive the support of the host Government through the participation of the Secretary of State for Transport – the Right Honourable Justine Greening MP – and of many Ambassadors, High Commissioners, Vice Minsters and others who have indicated their wish to participate in this very important debate – I wish to express my sincere appreciation to you all.

Reports received by the Organization indicate that, although the number of attacks by pirates continues to increase, the proportion of attacks that are successful has decreased.  This may be due to a number of factors, including naval protection and better implementation of IMO guidance and Best Management Practices, including the use of Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel (PCASP).  There is anecdotal evidence that the number of ships carrying firearms has increased.  On the basis of declarations of weapons carried and on their observations, naval forces estimate that around 25% of ships in the High Risk Area are carrying firearms, however it is also believed that a number of ships are not declaring the presence of private armed security for various reasons, including the lack of flag State approval.

The carriage of firearms on board merchant ships is a complex legal issue with Member States taking diverse positions.  The Committee has determined that the carriage of armed personnel is a matter for flag States to authorize, however it has also accepted that their carriage has legal implications for coastal and port States, particularly with respect to the carriage, embarkation and disembarkation of firearms and security equipment in areas under the jurisdiction of such port or coastal States.

Resolution A.1044(27) on piracy and armed robbery against ships in waters off the coast of Somalia endorses the position of this Committee that seafarers should not carry firearms and that the carriage of armed personnel on board ships for enhancing their protection should be left to flag States to decide, once a thorough risk assessment exercise has been carried out and following consultations with the shipowners concerned.

Amongst other things, the resolution strongly urges Governments which have not already done so:

.1 to decide as a matter of national policy, whether ships entitled to fly their flag should be authorized to carry privately contracted armed security personnel and, if so, under what conditions; and

.2 in their capacity as port or coastal States, to decide on their policy on the embarkation, disembarkation and carriage of privately contracted armed security personnel and of the firearms, ammunition and security-related equipment, and to promulgate it widely to other Member Governments, to industry, and to the Organization.

As a truly global industry with many stakeholders, shipping benefits from harmonization of procedures, adoption of common minimum standards and clarity with respect to national legal regimes.  However, while progress has been made on developing general guidance, policy on the use of Private Security Guards is not common among Member Governments and, across the shipping industry.  There are no agreed minimum performance standards for Private Security Guards and ships using them are subject to many, diverse legal regimes at present.

In order to stimulate debate on this important subject, we have issued MSC 90/20/5, which describes the current situation and outlines a number of related policy issues requiring further deliberation by this Committee.  While recognizing the reality of the situation in which Private Security Guards are employed and the diverse positions of Governments, there is a need to consider how the international community should deal with the issue of Private Security Guards and, in particular, the need to arrive at practical solutions to the issue.

Since the issue of Private Security Guards on board ships is of utmost sensitivity and requires detailed consideration of the policy issues involved, I considered it particularly helpful and appropriate, under this agenda item, for the Committee to engage in a high-level policy debate on this topic.

I invite all Member Governments representing flag, port and coastal States and States of seafarers, and shipowners to share their views on this issue of arms on board which is now critical for the international maritime community.

The outcome of your discussions today will provide the clear policy direction required for subsequent discussions on related, technical documents that the Committee and its Maritime Security and Piracy Working Group will be considering under this agenda item.

***

We have been dealing with piracy problems off the coast of Somalia for 5 years now.

Despite serious efforts by Governments, navies and the industry, the international community has not been able to stop Somali piracy.

We have seen significant developments over the last 4 years:

• Internationally Recommended Transit Corridor in the Gulf of Aden
• EUNAVFOR and strong action by international navies
• Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia and its working groups
• Implementation of Best Management Practices
• IMO-led Djibouti Code of Conduct
• Contact Group Trust Fund and IMO Djibouti Code Trust Fund

and still the industry is asking for the strong will of Governments to take action and end piracy.

Seafarers are suffering.  For insurance or trade partners, this may be just a matter of probability, but for seafarers it is a reality and a matter of life.

IMO has been actively advocating the strong will of Governments and, for example, the Council adopted the theme for last year’s World Maritime Day to be: “IMO: Orchestrating the response”.  But words of a slogan cannot resolve the matter.

We must create an effective and robust mechanism to prosecute and punish pirates.

We must ensure strong defence for merchant ships.

We must work together to help Somalia to build up their country and we must create a united front and stronger international regime to deal with and end piracy off the coast of Somalia.

This High-level segment was designed to discuss the current policy issue of private armed guards, but:

I hope that this High-level segment, with the participation of Secretaries of State, Ministers, Vice-Ministers, Permanent Secretaries, Ambassadors, High Commissioners, could also discuss the matter of piracy in general and may even go beyond the issue of arms on board, and come up with a clear indication of the determination of the international community to end piracy off the coast of Somalia.

I am looking forward to listening to your views, visions and leadership.

Thank you Mr. Chairman.

A new naval weapon has attracted hundreds of thousands of views on Youtube and left most people scratching their heads… is this thing real, or is the whole video a hoax?

Why in the world would you launch a missile by first dunking it in the ocean first?

The only thing I can think of would be to eliminate the hazard of the exhaust gases burning up the ship, which would pretty much allow you to fire this thing from almost anywhere.  Perhaps you could even install this system on Zodiac or small boat?

Hmm…

Dear Sirs,
Please be advised that on 28/11/2011, we have received from the Ministry of Defence their letter dated 21/11/2011 and also the Naval Operations Department’s letter dated 3/12/2011 instructing with the following:

1. The Egyptian Government forbids the presence of any Weapons / Armed Guards on board of commercial vessels as per the rules and regulations of the International Maritime Organization.
2. In case of the presence of weapons on board commercial vessels calling at Egyptian ports, the Masters shall lock the weapons in a safe compartment on board and issue a certificate stating these weapons and delivering it to the pilot in waiting area, the certificate shall include a confirmation from the Master that weapons will be delivered to Port Police Forces once berthed to be locked after being inspected by the police forces and to be returned back to vessel before departing the port.
3. In case of not adopting the above regulations, the vessel will not be permitted to enter the port.
4. In case of vessels transiting the Suez Canal, the Port Police Forces will be receiving the weapons from the transiting vessels at points of entrance inland and will be returned back to the vessel at point of departure.
5. In case of presence of weapons on board vessels in territorial waters or in ports in waiting areas or during transit of the Suez Canal, the Master and crew will be in violation of the Egyptian Laws under which the vessel will be under arrest together with the Master and crew and the persons holding the weapons without permits and the law number 394 of the year 1954 and its amendments will be applied. This violation will be attended by the General Prosecutor where a Police Verbal Process will be issued accordingly.

Please apply these regulations provided by Ministry of Defence accurately and notify all shipping companies and agencies and all Masters of vessels calling at Egyptian Ports.

Yours Faithfully
Head of Maritime Transport Sector
( Signature )
Admiral / El Sayed Hamed Hedaya

Source of Information:
Ahmed Raafat
Egyptian Marine Insurance Consultations & Services
Alexandria ,Egypt
emics@emicsegypt.com

GHOST. Photo: Juliet Marine Systems

The number of threats posing significant risks to maritime security these days seems to be never ending, always changing, and rapidly growing.  Pirates, rogue governments, terrorism; all seem to be organizing an accelerating – and rather freighting – rate.  So what can we do?  Have the world navies place destroyers in every vital waterway, every ocean or body of water in the world? It would be nice, depending on who you talk to, but unrealistic.  The issue has led a number of private companies come up with their own solutions.  Some have been good, a lot have been bad, and many have been downright ridiculous.

Now enter GHOST.  Developed by the privately held Juliet Marine Systems, a technology systems company based in Portsmouth, NH, the company believes they have the solution for many of the increasing threats to maritime security.

A view of the cockpit of GHOST. Photo: Juliet Marine Systems

Described as an attack helicopter on water, GHOST is a high-speed attack craft specifically designed to protect vital waterways like the Straits of Hormuz and counter threats such as piracy.  With swarm attacks and close-to-shore operation in mind, the GHOST was designed with speed, maneuverability, endurance and the ability to carry a hefty payload.

JMS says that, deployed, GHOST would have the capability to conduct long duration patrols and missions, adding that two squadrons of GHOSTs operating from Bahrain or Djibouti could effectively provide protection to destroyers or cruisers operating within the region.

“No country would be able to keep Iran from closing the Straits of Hormuz without conflict with Iran’s small high-speed boats,” said JMS President and CEO, Gregory Sancoff.  “These swarm attacks are the Navy’s equivalent of the IED. GHOST is the counter-IED solution to this hit and run attack weapon.”

As for the GHOST’s firepower, JMS says the possibilities are endless and the company is currently seeking a weapons integrator.  The vessel is designed to conceal all weaponry in enclosed bays allowing for an improved radar cross section, reducing GHOST’s radar signature significantly.

So is GHOST practical in the field and a promising solution for maritime security in the Straits of Hormuz or Gulf of Aden? We’ll just have to wait and see.  But, one is for sure… the thing looks pretty cool.

GHOST during sea trials. Photo: Juliet Marine Systems

Thor Liberty – Photo by Laurie Gilbert

An Isle Of Mann-registered ship was detained by authorities in Finland last week for smuggling missiles and explosives out of the country.

The vessel was stopped and the local bomb squad called in when officials at the port of Kotka found sixty nine Patriot defense missiles and 150 tonnes of general explosives on board.  According to Petri Lounatmaa a Finnish Customs spokesman, investigating officers did not know the origin of the missiles or who was supposed to receive them.   “We have impounded the explosives and missiles and asked the Defense Ministry to transport and store them.”  Mr. Lounatmaa told the New York Times.

Alarms sounded in the port shortly after dock workers discovered explosive material stored on open pallets which lead police to conduct a search of the ship’s cargo containers. What they found shocked them. Inside containers labeled and manifested as “fireworks” where highly sophisticated Patriot defense missiles.

Initial evidence suggests that the missiles might have originated from an official shipment of missiles from Germany to South Korea but the facts remain unclear. Also unclear is the port of destination. The vessel’s managers, Greenstar Steamship Company of Germany, where not available for comment.

Finland says that the ship and her Ukrainian crew are now free to leave, following an operation to repack the explosives safely in metal containers.  The missiles and the both the ship’s captain and first mate are being held in custody however until further evidence is collected.

The Office of Specialized Capabilities (CG-721) is located in Coast Guard headquarters and reports directly to the Assistant Commandant for Capability, Rear Admiral Vincent Atkins, but works with all CG departments to develop weapons, ammunition, and dive capabilities for use worldwide. The team has a number of projects under development, but the latest project is the LA-51, officially known as Less Lethal Warning Munitions, used for non-compliant vessel interdiction. In simple terms, the LA-51 is meant to get your attention.

Being the Coast Guard, the military structure of the organization is always balanced with a goal to save and protect seafarers. The CG certainly has powerful weapons capable of protecting of the nation during times of war, but most of their operations are focused on saving lives, not taking them, A\and the LA-51 supports this objective.

Fired from a standard shotgun, the LA-51 is a two-part round, the first being standard to all shotgun munitions… a casing and charge to encase and propel the round to its target up to 200 meters away.  The second part, the projectile, is non-standard. Comprised of pyrotechnics and a time delay, the projectile of an LA-51 round hesitates for a brief moment before exploding in a brilliant, and deafening thunder of smoke and noise.  It is a non-lethal weapon used for getting the attention of non-responsive vessels.

The LA-51 is not a new type of ammunition;  it is already used by the US Navy and special operations forces worldwide.  Speaking from his office in Washington, Lt. Cmdr Kenneth Nagie CG-7211, briefly discussed how CG-721 works with other enforcement agencies, like Customs And Border Protection, and the military through the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, spearheaded by the US Marine Corps in Quantico, Virginia.  Lt. Cmdr Nagie says, “Various units in the Coast Guard have been working since the mid-90s exploring ways to fill a gap between lethal and non-lethal weapons, but these functions were merged into CG-721 at its formation in 2009.”

This is not the US Coast Guard’s first non-lethal weapon.

According to Nagie, the USCG is currently using various means to deal with suspects in the most humane way possible. Simplest in design are handcuffs for basic restraint, however units do carry more sophisticated non-lethal devices, although the particular details are under development.

“The LA-51 is a project we want people to know about” says Nagie. “The primary purpose of the LA-51 is to get a vessel’s attention and determine intent.” Certainly a different perspective from the military shock-and-awe tactical use for related Flash Bang devices.

Non-lethal weapon development is only one part of CG-721’s job, the office also works on weapon systems with more aggressive capabilities including the Gyro Stabilized Weapons System (GSWS).

Those who follow US Navy operations are familiar with the close-in weapon system referred by most as CIWS (pronounced Sea-Whizz). Developed as the last line of ship defense, the CIWS is an automated Gatling Gun capable of independently detecting and engaging hostile targets (such as missiles)  and unloading an incredible firestorm of precisely targeted 20mm tungsten rounds, all without human intervention. Being the Coast Guard, the GSWS only matches the Navy’s device in broad similarity.

Rather than being fully automated, the GSWS is only assisted by computerized systems, its operation remains under the control of a qualified gunner, but these systems do automate many of the processes like target acquisition and ranging. The Coast Guard denied comment on specifics of the weapon, which is still in the early development stages, but you can expect thermal imaging and other modern systems to be incorporated in the device. Despite the GSWS’s design as a decidedly lethal weapon, the drive for it’s development is one of protecting, not taking, human life. “The system allows the gunner to operate the weapon remotely and from a protected position”.

While gCaptain still loves the science behind super weapons, like the Navy’s new Free Electron Laser, we are pleased that the Coast Guard is taking a different route in Research And Development. While many of CG-721’s other projects remain classified, we are sure they remain true to their mission of keeping our waterways and mariners safe.

The MSC approved an MSC Circular on Interim guidance to shipowners, ship operators, and shipmasters on the use of privately contracted armed security personnel on board ships in the High Risk Area, and Interim recommendations for flag States on the use of privately contracted armed security personnel on board ships in the High Risk Area. Both sets of guidance are aimed at addressing the complex issue of the employment of private, armed security on board ships.

The guidance notes that flag State jurisdiction and any laws and regulations imposed by the flag State concerning the use of private security companies apply to their vessels. Port and coastal States’ laws may also apply to such vessels.

The guidance notes that the use of privately contracted armed security personnel (PCASP) should not be considered as an alternative to the Best Management Practices to Deter Piracy off the Coast of Somalia and in the Arabian Sea area (BMP) and other protective measures. Placing armed guards on board as a means to secure and protect the vessel and its crew should only be considered after a risk assessment has been carried out. It is also important to involve the Master in the decision making process.   The guidance includes sections on risk assessment, selection criteria, insurance cover, command and control, management and use of weapons and ammunition at all times when on board and rules for the use of force as agreed between the shipowner, the private maritime security company and the Master.

The interim recommendations for flag States recommend that flag States should have in place a policy on whether or not the use of PCASP will be authorized and, if so, under which conditions. A Flag State should take into account the possible escalation of violence which could result from the use of firearms and carriage of armed personnel on board ships when deciding on its policy.  The recommendations are not intended to endorse or institutionalize the use of PCASP and do not address all the legal issues that might be associated with their use onboard ships.

An intersessional meeting of the Working Group on Maritime Security and Piracy will meet  in the week commencing 12 September 2011,  to develop recommendations to Governments (flag, port and coastal States) on the use of PCASP; review the interim guidance to shipowners, ship operators and shipmasters on the use of PCASP for any consequential amendments;  agree an MSC circular for the promulgation of the recommendations to Governments on the use of PCASP;  if necessary, agree a revised MSC circular on Guidance to shipowners, ship operators and shipmasters on the use of PCASP; and identify any necessary consequential amendments to the Recommendations to Governments for preventing and suppressing piracy and armed robbery against ships  (MSC.1/Circ.1333) and the Guidance to shipowners and ship operators, shipmasters and crews on preventing and suppressing acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships (MSC.1/Circ.1334).

The MSC also adopted an MSC resolution on Implementation of Best Management Practice guidance, which strongly urges all parties concerned to take action to ensure better implementation of these important measures, recognising the urgent need for merchant shipping to take every possible measure to protect itself from pirate attack and that effective self-protection is the key to avoiding, evading and deterring pirate attacks.

The resolution strongly urges all those concerned to take action to ensure that as a minimum and as recommended in the Best Management Practices: ships’ masters receive updated information before and during sailing through the defined High Risk Area; ships register with the Maritime Security Centre Horn of Africa and report to United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) Dubai; and ships effectively implement all recommended preventive, evasive and defensive measures.

The MSC also agreed Guidelines to assist in the investigation of the crimes of piracy and armed robbery against ships, which are intended to be used in conjunction with resolution A.1025(26) Code of Practice for the Investigation of the Crimes of Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships. The guidelines are intended to assist an investigator to collect evidence, including forensic evidence, to support the submission of written reports which may assist in the subsequent identification, arrest and prosecution of the pirates that held the vessel and crew captive. Formats for crew statements and logging of evidence are included, as well as guidelines on recovery and packaging of exhibits such as blood, clothing and weapons.

IMO Secretary-General Mr. Efthimios E. Mitropoulos welcomed the progress made by the Committee in addressing the piracy issue.

“I am pleased with the progress the Committee was able to make on all the piracy related items it had set out to consider during the session and, in particular, on the development of guidance to the industry and recommendations to flag States on the use of privately contracted armed security personnel on ships scheduled to sail through Indian Ocean areas exploited by pirates launching their operations from Somalia or mother ships.  The decision of the Committee to convene an intersessional working group in September to draft guidance to flag, port and coastal States shows its determination to deal with this sensitive issue in the most expeditious and effective manner,” he said.

“I also welcome the Committee’s decision to promote wider compliance of merchant ships with the industry Best Management Practice guidance, as I believe that their diligent implementation will contribute substantially to keeping pirates at bay,” Mr. Mitropoulos said

The number of acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships reported to the  Organization and which occurred in 2010 was 489, against 406 during the previous year, an increase of 20.4% from the figure for 2009. The areas most affected (i.e. five incidents reported or more) in 2010 were East Africa and the Indian Ocean followed by the Far East and, in particular, the South China Sea, West Africa, South America and the Caribbean. During the year, it was reported that two crew members were killed and 30 crew members were reportedly injured/assaulted, while 1,027 crew members were reportedly taken hostage or kidnapped. Fifty-seven vessels were reportedly hijacked, with one vessel reportedly still unaccounted for.

In the first four months of 2011, 214 incidents were reported to the Organization.

Via IMO

The micro-robotic company ReconRobotics has developed what they hope is the new standard in piracy reconnaissance aboard ship, the Recon Scout Throwbot piracy reconnaissance system.  The system is based on a tiny, 1.2 lb. robot equipped with magnetic wheels that will, among other things, allow the remotely controlled robot to climb up and over the hull of a ship.  The company believes the prototype micro-robot platform could have immediate applications in maritime piracy interdiction and in protecting the lives of shipboard military personnel.

The magnetized robot is uses the Recon Scout Throwbot platform, which is widely used by military and law enforcement personnel to conduct immediate reconnaissance within dangerous and hostile environments. These robots are distinguished by their small size, rugged durability, versatility and ease of use. For example, the Recon Scout XT weighs just 1.2 pounds, can be deployed in five seconds and can survive throws of 120 feet. Like the Recon Scout XT, the magnetized concept robot is also equipped with an infrared optical system that enables it to see in complete darkness.

What do you think, can this new micro-robotic system get its sea legs?

Via ReconRobotics

To get in the game, Mace Personal Defense Inc manufacturer of Mace brand pepper spray, has teamed up with Shipboard Defense Systems, a firm specializing in non-lethal vessel protection, to develop an on-board system to repel pirates similar to the point and spray solution proven effective by helpless women, the paranoid public, and law enforcement everywhere.

The system is designed with 300 gallon pressurized tanks that, when activated, disperses a “RAINSTORM” of Mace pepper spray solution into the $$$-filled eyes of approaching pirates.  The solution, applied properly, will cause shortness of breath, intense eye irritation, obscured vision, burning and inflammation for up to 45 minutes.

Dennis Raefield, Mace’s CEO says, “The Mace-SDS solution is unique because it allows ships’ personnel to repel boarders, and avoids the issue of arming vessels with guns. In addition, the SDS system is mounted on the perimeter of the ship and does not affect sea worthiness or require bulkhead penetrations. At Mace, we see significant potential if SDS becomes widely adopted. It offers a real solution to an escalating problem.”

Of course the hopes are that the system will become widely adopted, and it may, but we think it could be a while before your captain starts using the word “rainstorm” synonymous with deterring pirates.

BMP3 has got nothing on on manikins!