From the Beeb:
Three pirates were said to have been killed in the operation to free Captain Richard Phillips, who had been held in a lifeboat for several days.
Capt Phillips is said to be unhurt and on the USS Bainbridge, a warship sent to track the pirates holding him.
He was taken hostage after pirates briefly hijacked his ship, the Maersk Alabama on Wednesday.
On Friday he failed in an attempt to swim free.
An unnamed US official told the Associated Press that Capt Phillips was freed in what appeared to be a swift firefight.
You know a decision like this went all the way to the top, and to their credit, Obama’s White House was willing to make the call. And – to the immense credit of the operators who carried the mission out – they were successful.
Good for everyone, and welcome home, Capt. Phillips.
–
This is great news! Truly great.
Now to wait for the other shoe to drop…
That’s all good news.
Good news. Now, what would Stephen Decatur do next?
Actually, we don’t know that. Here’s “Blackfive’s take”:http://www.blackfive.net/main/2009/04/how-the-rescue-happened.html – the navy commander on the scene had standing authority to act if the hostage’s life was in imminent danger.
Now if the White House had given authorization to act if the captain’s life was in “imminent danger”, that wouldn’t be worth even two cheers in my book. They should have been ordered to undertake any opportunity to free the captain, whether he was in imminent danger or not.
Maybe such an order was given, but we don’t know that.
Check out “this NYT account”:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/world/africa/13pirates.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&ref=africa (while it still exists):
And in the BBC story AL linked above:
No doubt the pirates pointed weapons at Phillips many times. If they had been allowed to take him ashore, which was their best bet, they would have pointed weapons at him for months and years while dangling him in our faces as a hostage. All because the Navy, AFTER TWO COMMUNICATIONS WITH OBAMA, had no more authority than a beat cop?
Thank God for the navy commander on the scene, and three dead-eye snipers. If anybody else deserves to be showered with rose petals, I’m not seeing it.
Eh, I don’t know about that. The navy commander would have had standing authority to use force to protect the captain regardless.
I happen to think Obama handled this well. He gave the pirates plenty of opportunity to surrender peacefully, and once it became clear they were delusional enough to think they were getting away with their hostage he allowed his commanders on the ground the authority to pick their moment, all the while in the context of self-defense. In a sense it was a wink and a nod, because of course the captain was constantly in imminent danger, but it allowed Obama to maintain an air of law and justice while still bringing our man out safe and sending a strong message to the pirates.
The next time this happens the pirates won’t be under the delusion that their lives are secure. That’s certainly a double edged sword, but i think its healthy. This idea that you can hold guns to hostages heads and still be non-violent (or whatever the spin is) needed to end. When you commit violence against American’s you commit violence against America, and you can only expect the reprisal to be deadly. That’s a good message.
Or more succinctly, next time don’t bring a knife to a gun fight.
Obama’s White house _ducked_ the call. The Navy captain made it – and if anything had gone wrong it would have been his career ended, and Obama would have thrown him under the bus. Hence the “wink and nod” approach, rather than a straightforward order.
If it had been a SEAL raid OKed, that would be one thing. If the snipers had been ordered to shoot as soon as a good opportunity to take out all targets and rescue the hostage presented itself, that would also be different. I initially believed that had been the case, and was prepared to revise my opinion of the guy. But it turns out, that wasn’t the order.
Having the Navy stand by for 2-3 days, doing nothing… that means means “an air of law and justice” that lets Obama look good, while placing the fallout squarely on the Captain’s shoulders, is more important than the hostage’s well being. The guy whose life could be ended at any time if things go squirrely, and you let events play you rather than the reverse.
Which is all pretty much typical of President O.
Real law and justice means terminating pirate hostage-takers as soon as it is practical to do so, with no apologies and no dithering. Wasn’t the case here. The only ones I’m applauding are the 2 ship captains.
Ultimately, the solution is to arm merchant ships with remote-controlled weapon stations. They bolt on to the deck with no other modifications, and can mount machine guns or even light 20mm-27mm cannon, coupled with ammo, calibrated sights, zoom cameras, and infared. They get their name because they can be controlled and fired from anywhere on ship by using a joystick and screen, and are pretty cheap.
Let the merchants sail in international waters, and end the threats themselves. As high scores mount for the new Somali Invaders game, piracy will become a much less popular carer choice in Somalia. And hostage-takings will be nil for ships that choose to protect themselves.
mark:
“In a sense it was a wink and a nod, because of course the captain was constantly in imminent danger, but it allowed Obama to maintain an air of law and justice while still bringing our man out safe and sending a strong message to the pirates.”
The initial reports were that with the ports closed the snipers couldn’t get a shot. I don’t think it was until recently the heat forced them to open the ports making the rescue possible.
Of course a SEAL raid could have been launched earlier, but it would have probably meant the death of the Captain and possibly US casualties.
On the other hand that drifting boat wasn’t going anywhere any time soon. I think it was wise to take our time and try for a diplomatic solution- it also sent a positive message that we ARE trying to do things non-violently, but these guys aren’t playing ball. Essentially Obama was very fortunate in all of these circumstances and everything worked out as well as could be expected.
I don’t think arming all the merchies is really a viable option for a number of reasons (expense not being least). Now if we really wanted to end this threat, we’d just declare the coast of Somalia a maritime exclusion zone and go in and scuttle any ship we could find including those in dock. Without the mother-ships to ferry the pirates out to the shipping lanes, there is no real threat. This would ultimately require a lot less resources than trying to patrol half the Indian Ocean and get lucky.
Guys, I strongly disagree with those who are bashing the WH on this; I don’t think there’s enough information to make this call…
Nor do I understand how this could have played out differently and better – a raid on an enclosed boat was almost certain to put the Captain’s life at risk.
The question to decide this would be what happened when Phillips jumped out of the boat – whether no action was taken because the snipers were not in position/ready or because the WH hadn’t given them a ROE that allowed action.
Marc
StrategyPage suggests that the pirates are immune to attack (link). If the author of this article knows what he is talking about, I see no flaw in his logic.
I refuse to participate in the type of second guessing and micromanaging of military decisions that we saw under Bush, particularly when the outcome is positive. Marc is right, we don’t even have the whole story anyway. We’d do well to remember that what the navy pulled off was pretty amazing, and shouldn’t be considered just another option that could have been executed any time. 3 kill shots from one moving ship to another requires specific conditions to even consider- lines of sight, calm enough seas, visibility. It might well be that all the stars finally lined up and they took the shots at the best opportunity.
Strategy Page is right, in and of itself, but it misses the option I proposed, which is to go after anything that can be used as a mother-ship and scuttle it. We can hit ships in dock with smart weapons without high explosives (the have cement payloads) that will just punch a hole in the vessels. Obviously this would create a major political headache with the usual suspects at the UN, but if we actually wanted this problem solved with a minimum of bloodshed and expense, that would be the answer.
I would combine it by reaching out to the tribal elders with some offers of aid and reconstruction to make up for the lost fishing revenue. Of course if the Somalians are to be taken seriously their waters are fished out so there really is no legitimate reason for Somalian ships to be out there.
mark:
Well, that’s not the story we’re being told. We’re being told that they acted because Phillips was in imminent danger. One of the pirates pointed a weapon at Phillips, and viola, the perfect conditions for 3 fatal shots existed at that moment, and not before?
A bullet in the head is certainly a strong message. “A wink and a nod” is not. Neither is taking credit for things that you refuse to take responsibility for.
Eh, it might have been viscerally nicer for the Navy to say “hey, pirates!”, kill them all, rescue the hostage, hunt down their home port, and level the village before even bothering to phone home about it… but all’s well that ends well, so I shouldn’t grumble.
I’ve got little sympathy for the Somalis involved. Okay, your coast is overfished (allegedly by big nasty foreign fishing vessels, sure.) That doesn’t give anyone the right to grab an AK and hoist the Jolly Roger any more than an inland village suffering from drought has the right to start kidnapping people from neighboring villages for slavery. No, seriously, it ain’t your only option. It is, however, an option that will get your butt shot off.
I’m glad that we’ve made it clear that “pirates go free” is absolutely not an option. Negotiations didn’t break down over a dollar amount or some procedural point, but over the crux of the matter – we weren’t going to let those guys go, no matter what else occurred.
I’m not terribly worried about lots of responsibility being thrust on the captain of the vessel involved. This is the US Navy, not the Boy Scouts; the captain is supposed to be the go-to man, for where the buck stops, by long tradition. I’d rather have captains given the latitude to act and succeed in cases like this, then to have the White House responsible for every last little thing and in consequence have everyone down the line hobbled, lest something go awry.
Finally, the civilian ship captain is quite admirable. It’s a mystery why he was able to swim at all, with the weight of his enormous brass balls dragging him down… The best to him and his family.