United Nations Resolutions & Piracy

[Whimsy]

Originally Posted by hummingway

Please do not post to this thread unless you actually wish to discuss the subject. Gratuitous comments on the UN or anything else will be deleted. If you don't believe there is any merit in discussing this then the solution is simple, don't. It is a simple mark of respect to allow others to carry on the discussion.

Thank you.

The title of the discussion is "United Nations Resolutions & Piracy".

If some significant percentage of those who took the time to read posts here tended to exhibit a certain view of the UN, that to me would be quite relevant to a conversation of any resolution issued thereby.

It is well-recognized in human society in general, and reflected in government court proceedings in particular, that the credibility of any who would hold themselves up as an authority, the UN in this case, must bear the closest scrutiny by society as to their reputation, character, competence, track record, and the validity of any authority they claim to hold.

This seems to get to the root of the issue:
"I think that the United Nations today is virtually impotent when you stop to think that countries representing two-thirds of the votes of the United Nations represent less than 10 percent of the world population. It’s a funny thing that everybody who wants one-man, one-vote doesn’t hold it true for the United Nations!"
--Ronald Reagan

If the title of this thread were, "Afghanistan, Cuba, North Korea, Somalia, Rwanda, Yemen, and Zimbabwe Issue Resolutions On Piracy", I would think it of prerequisite and foundational importance to establish the credibility and weight of authority of any such body of "united nations" prior to giving any serious consideration to any resolution they might issue.

In conclusion, and in direct response to a topic brought up in this thread, I'm guessing if I say the UN is the most wonderful and compassionate force for "social justice", egalitarianism and the establishment of global social-democratic utopianism, that's gonna be just fine. But if I say the UN is nothing more that an impotent, self-aggrandizing body of arrogant, chattering, power-mongering tyrannical leftists, and then opine that everywhere the UN sends its forces tends to turn into a hotbed of corruption, oppression, illegal drugs and child-sex trafficking, that's going to get my post censored, no matter the supporting evidence.

Censorship is one of the most important tools of tyranny. Will the spirit of impartiality or political bias rule the day here?

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Whimsy

In conclusion, and in direct response to a topic brought up in this thread, I'm guessing if I say the UN is the most wonderful and compassionate force for "social justice", egalitarianism and the establishment of global social-democratic utopianism, that's gonna be just fine. But if I say the UN is nothing more that an impotent, self-aggrandizing body of arrogant, chattering, power-mongering tyrannical leftists, and then opine that everywhere the UN sends its forces tends to turn into a hotbed of corruption, oppression, illegal drugs and child-sex trafficking, that's going to get my post censored, no matter the supporting evidence.

Censorship is one of the most important tools of tyranny. Will the spirit of impartiality or political bias rule the day here?

Sorry Whimsy.... I cannot respond to your analysis of the UN... either their 'sainthood' or their tendancy towards 'Corruption'... its beyond my limits within the Forums Rules....
Damn.... my tongues bleeding like crazy now.....

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by Whimsy

The title of the discussion is "United Nations Resolutions & Piracy".

If some significant percentage of those who took the time to read posts here tended to exhibit a certain view of the UN, that to me would be quite relevant to a conversation of any resolution issued thereby.

<snip>

Censorship is one of the most important tools of tyranny. Will the spirit of impartiality or political bias rule the day here?

Regardless of the title of the thread or your belief system anyone posting irrelevant comments on the UN of any bias is offtopic.

You are welcome to believe there is a bias here or anything else you care to believe but you are only welcome to post within the rules of the forum which can be found here:
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ork&page=rules

[DoubleWhisky]

I’m not a member of UN fanclub, but I dare to admit that UN actions regarding the piracy threat on Indian Ocean caused by Somali pirates are pretty logical.
The Security Council Resolution 1851 was just a call for international effort in enforcing the UN Convention on the High Seas.
The Convention on the High Seas is an international treaty created to codify the rules of international law relating to the high seas. The treaty was one of four agreed upon at the first United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS I). The treaty was signed 29 April 1958 and entered into force 30 September 1962.
The part of the treaty regarding the piracy is following:
Article 14
All States shall co-operate to the fullest possible extent in the repression of piracy on the high seas or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State.
Article 15
Piracy consists of any of the following acts:
(1) Any illegal acts of violence, detention or any act of depredation, committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed:
(a) On the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against persons or property on board such ship or aircraft;
(b) Against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside the jurisdiction of any State;
(2) Any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;
(3) Any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in sub-paragraph 1 or sub-paragraph 2 of this article.
Article 16
The acts of piracy, as defined in article 15, committed by a warship, government ship or government aircraft whose crew has mutinied and taken control of the ship or aircraft are assimilated to acts committed by a private ship.
Article 17
A ship or aircraft is considered a pirate ship or aircraft if it is intended by the persons in dominant control to be used for the purpose of committing one of the acts referred to in article 15. The same applies if the ship or aircraft has been used to commit any such act, so long as it remains under the control of the persons guilty of that act.
Article 18
A ship or aircraft may retain its nationality although it has become a pirate ship or aircraft. The retention or loss of nationality is determined by the law of the State from which such nationality was derived.
Article 19
On the high seas, or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State, every State may seize a pirate ship or aircraft, or a ship taken by piracy and under the control of pirates, and arrest the persons and seize the property on board. The courts of the State which carried out the seizure may decide upon the penalties to be imposed, and may also determine the action to be taken with regard to the ships, aircraft or property, subject to the rights of third parties acting in good faith.
Article 20
Where the seizure of a ship or aircraft on suspicion of piracy has been effected without adequate grounds, the State making the seizure shall be liable to the State the nationality of which is possessed by the ship or aircraft, for any loss or damage caused by the seizure.
Article 21
A seizure on account of piracy may only be carried out by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft on government service authorized to that effect.
Article 22
1. Except where acts of interference derive from powers conferred by treaty, a warship which encounters a foreign merchant ship on the high seas is not justified in boarding her unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting:
(a) That the ship is engaged in piracy; or
(b) That the ship is engaged in the slave trade; or
(c) That though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship.
2. In the cases provided for in sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) above, the warship may proceed to verify the ship's right to fly its flag. To this end, it may send a boat under the command of an officer to the suspected ship. If suspicion remains after the documents have been checked, it may proceed to a further examination on board the ship, which must be carried out with all possible consideration.
3. If the suspicions prove to be unfounded, and provided that the ship boarded has not committed any act justifying them, it shall be compensated for any loss or damage that may have been sustained.

This convention form an international legal basis for the action against the pirates.
As the international action against Somali pirates is now organized and rolling on, the reason for issuing Security Council Resolution 1851 vanished.
There are other problems present.
First: neither the Convention on the High Seas, nor any other international law in existence deal with the problem of piracy within the territorial waters of a country (a) supporting piracy, or (b) not able to suppress piracy. This problem can not be easily solved, as it touch to many sensitive problems: any military action taken by one country within the territorial waters of other country is a violation of the sovereignty of the latter country, whatever is the reason. Making an exception to this rule in predictable time is at least very improbable.
Second: most of the legal systems in the world do contain some regulations regarding pirates. Unhappily, these regulations are in general very, very dated and in most cases deal only with piracy within territorial waters of any given country, or with acts of piracy committed against the vessels sailing under the flag of such a country.
There is obvious and urgent need to amend most of the legal systems in order to enable effective legal proceedings against the pirates in all the countries involved.
This is what Security Council Resolution 1918 is calling for.

With best regards

Tomasz

[Whimsy]

Oops! I see another post I agree with has bitten the dust. What I see as a just hamburgers on the hoof are apparently someone's sacred cows...

Originally Posted by boatman61

Sorry Whimsy.... I cannot respond to your analysis of the UN... either their 'sainthood' or their tendancy towards 'Corruption'... its beyond my limits within the Forums Rules....
Damn.... my tongues bleeding like crazy now.....

Well, I'm all for rules, specifically the "rule of law" over the "rule of man", but ONLY to the extent that the rules are enforced impartially and that everyone receives equal treatment under the rules, which is basically the definition of the difference between the two. And I also understand that this forum is privately owned and owes no one a platform to speak, nor is it, evidently or legally, under any obligation to allow every side or view equal exposure - the "record" here is obviously carefully manicured to give later viewers a certain carefully-fabricated impression of what the public opinion really is here.

But on the main topic, I'm curious to know how this works with the UN and its resolutions on piracy. If the UN says this is OK but that isn't, to what extent does it, or can it, enforce these resolutions? Which in many ways is the same as asking to what extent is the UN relevant as a world power? And that in turn brings the question to what extent should the politicians of major nations continue to spend the money of their constituents, too often against their will, on UN dues, especially when there is not equal representation in the UN based on population?

Would it be cheaper and easier to just offer general rewards for the pirates or actionable intelligence leading to their being brought to justice, and/or the safe return of hostages and ships? A few $5M or $10M rewards offered here and there would be small-change to major nations, but a powerful inspiration either to hard-core, professional "action-figures", or to those "little people" who may be close to the pirates and could offer intelligence, but who have small hope of prosperity otherwise.

OR, maybe the shipping companies, and/or insurance companies could band together and offer similar private rewards to accomplish in the real world what governments seem too bound by political correctness to acheive in the fantasy world in which they increasingly seem to operate.

Rewards to those who actually perform and provide value rather than "payments" to those who don't - what a concept!

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Whimsy

Rewards to those who actually perform and provide value rather than "payments" to those who don't - what a concept!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Mfd4E7kpvc

[Whimsy]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Elvis video link

Ha! Thought you were getting off topic a little there, Brother, until I considered specific lyrics:

To fight the unbeatable foe
To run where the brave dare not go
To right the unrightable wrong
No matter how hopeless, no matter how far
To fight for the right
Without question or pause
To be willing to march
Into hell for a heavenly cause
And the world will be better for this

And that's exactly what's needed to root out the pirates. We need serious financial incentives for individuals who can still get stuff done to go in to where the pirates and the hostages and captured ships are. What's needed is operators who are willing to fight fire with fire, and play more by the rules the pirates themselves have established than by the rules a PC society has formed sitting on their butts, generation after generation, in comfort and safety, reading the NY Times, watching cable news and consuming taxpayer-funded TV and radio.

The pirates have set the rules. The pirates have captured and keep huge ships and large numbers of hostages, for years at a time. The pirates are "hiding" only to the extent that forces are unwilling to go in and confront them. The pirates laugh at the puny efforts of a PC society unwilling to do what needs to be done for fear of violating some PC rules. The pirates laugh at the UN resolutions, and by extension, the chattering desk-jockeys that issue them.

"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
-- R. J. Wiedemann LtCol. USMC Ret.

[capn_billl]

I'll have to sound in on this one. Those calling for the UN to do more, be careful what you ask for. Remember There are always unintended consequences.

Example: remember the post about sinking all armed ships? That is not that far off the mark. What is a pirate ship? We hear about these mother ships, but how do you identify one? They don't have a big sign that says pirate mother ship on the side. And even if they did, You are going to have ships from ALL of the worlds navies getting a piece of this action. What is to stop a lets say Iranian warship sending a torpedo to a Isreali warship, and saying woops I though it was a pirate mothership, "my AIS was on the blink".
Or even yachts, If you turn on your AIS you just put a big bullseye on your boat for ht epirates . Turn it off and now you are a suspected pirate ship. Have any thing on board that can be misconstrued as a weapon, In the boarding parties country of origin), and you just lost your ship.

Indiscriminate boarding to check ALL ships in the area for weapons, .... sounds good right??? Until a Rawandan, (or any country in the world that might have an axe to grind against yours), force wants to inspect yours for anything they might deem illegal, (like foreign to them currency?)

A lot of ideas of hiring armed mercenaries are floating around, a coalition ship comes across two small boats firing at each other with small arms, one of them is your mercenaries protecting your boat, the other is the pirates in a stolen yacht, which one will get sunk???

Your a naval captain of a third world warship, and come across one of the above scenario's, who are you going to sink? The boat containing a group of your neighbors, and possibly relatives, or the boat full of "rich white guys" that shouldn't even be there? Remember He may still be upset about losing a war to the parent country of one of the boats.

Piracy off of the coast of africa has been a problem for the last several thousand years. Until the cultures concerned feel that free trade is more profitable than piracy, and they gain the belief that piracy is wrong it will continue. Use of force by the countries affected will only suppress it.

Why hasn't that happened? Pay off a couple of million in ransom, or put a couple of billion in warships on full duty? Hmmmm we have a budget crisis, and the warships are busy.

[Sabbatical II]

As I understand it the UN is a democratic organisation, the members of which represent the countries of most that participate in this forum. So how the UN acts is dependant upon how our representatives vote on each issue. Decisions made are therefore the collective wishes of the governments of the member countries. Once a resolution is passed and action is decided upon it requires funds to carry out the mission. It's interesting that historically, many of the member countries have been very slow in coming up with the funds to finance actions they have voted for.

And we wonder why the UN is inneffective?

Greg

[goboatingnow]

Could we leave the right wing over the top comments out. Comments denigrating public broadcasting social institutions etc.. This type of nonsense contributes nothing to the debate.

The US perspective is just that , one view amongst many and often like others it's views are sometimes wrong . It is far from infallible

The " gung hoh" wild west approach really is great in fiction in reality there are real legal and practical difficulties military force. ( not to mention 650 hostages whose lives are probably forfeit if there is sustained military action , but hey who cares there're not American right?)

Dave

[svBeBe]

estarzinger, good summary

Bill
BeBe

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Whimsy

Ha! Thought you were getting off topic a little there, Brother, until I considered specific lyrics:

To fight the unbeatable foe
To run where the brave dare not go
To right the unrightable wrong
No matter how hopeless, no matter how far
To fight for the right
Without question or pause
To be willing to march
Into hell for a heavenly cause
And the world will be better for this

And that's exactly what's needed to root out the pirates. We need serious financial incentives for individuals who can still get stuff done to go in to where the pirates and the hostages and captured ships are. What's needed is operators who are willing to fight fire with fire, and play more by the rules the pirates themselves have established than by the rules a PC society has formed sitting on their butts, generation after generation, in comfort and safety, reading the NY Times, watching cable news and consuming taxpayer-funded TV and radio.

The pirates have set the rules. The pirates have captured and keep huge ships and large numbers of hostages, for years at a time. The pirates are "hiding" only to the extent that forces are unwilling to go in and confront them. The pirates laugh at the puny efforts of a PC society unwilling to do what needs to be done for fear of violating some PC rules. The pirates laugh at the UN resolutions, and by extension, the chattering desk-jockeys that issue them.

"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
-- R. J. Wiedemann LtCol. USMC Ret.

Yo... Whimsy... nice to meet a thinker... a pleasant change from the norm...
No.. thats uncalled for... just a gut reaction from the blow em away brigade...
Mind... I must admit to suggesting Stuka's primed with semtex and 'Dets' to dive bomb skiffs.. so I'm not a nice guy really...

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Whimsy

The pirates laugh at the UN resolutions, and by extension, the chattering desk-jockeys that issue them.

"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
-- R. J. Wiedemann LtCol. USMC Ret.

This is all it comes down to!

[Blue Stocking]

So-- the Russians have the answer, and the UN is just providing daily work for the --UN ?
Doesn't help the unfortunate folks on the Quest, does it?

[Boracay]

It seems to me that unless they are caught red handed it's not going to be possible to catch pirates.

The problem is that any boat on the high seas has a perfect right to be there; armed to the teeth does not change that.

So we need a new offense, or maybe even offenses. Something like unauthorised carrying of weapons on the high seas. Any boat with weapons onboard would need to have authorisation from their country of origin.

Or not carrying the paperwork checking them out from their last port.

If certain influential countries believe that carrying arms is a basic human right we could make it only apply to certain zones.