Let the hand-wringing begin

Let's get one thing out of the way first. I didn't criticize Obama's handling of the Maersk Alabama piracy for the simple reason that there wasn't anything to criticize. Well, OK...side-stepping a reporter's question by saying he wanted to talk about housing when he could have issued a simple response indicating the situation had his attention was kinda dumb. But I thought the constant cries of "why isn't Obama doing anything?" during the hostage standoff were kinda dumb, too. The ship and crew were safe and absent an immediate threat to Capt. Phillips' life, there was no need to rush a rescue attempt. It's quite likely that our own military counseled against assaulting the enclosed lifeboat unless the situation detiorated. Obama did the right thing in leaving the decision to those on the scene and pre-approving the action they needed to take.

What's important now is how Obama follows through. The Somali piracy problem didn't end yesterday when our Navy rescued Phillips. In fact, it's likely to get worse.

The killing of three Somali pirates in the dramatic U.S. Navy rescue of a cargo ship captain has sparked concern for other hostages and fears that the stakes have been raised for future hijackings in the busy Indian Ocean shipping lane.

[ ... ]

It "could escalate violence in this part of the world, no question about it," said Vice Adm. Bill Gortney, commander of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command.

A couple things are almost certain. One is that with piracy being the linchpin to some local economies in Somalia, it's not going to stop just because of this episode. The second is that the piracies will become more violent.

Somalia is not just a failed state, it's a non-state. That became evident the other day when Somali "officials" blamed the US for the breakdown in negotiations on our insistence that the pirates be arrested and prosecuted. There's really nobody in control there and what little authority is exercised in Somalia is local and is owned by the warlords who employ the pirates.

That leaves the US and other nations with functioning naval forces in the region to make it too costly for the pirates to operate. Blockade the pirates' harbors by establishing an exclusion zone off the coast of Somalia. Primitive though they might be, the pirates have a functioning logistical support network that can be taken out with relative ease.

There is simply no reason to allow the pirates to continue to operate with impunity. What remains to be seen is whether Barack Obama has the resolve to do something about it or if he'll join the rest of the world in wringing his hands over it.

Awesome: Ship's captain free, 3 pirates dead

AP is reporting that Capt. Richard Phillips of the Maersk Alabama is safely in the hands of the US Navy, and three of the Somali pirates killed and one captured in a "swift" firefight with Navy SEALs.

Update: Drew M. at AoSHQ is saying Phillips jumped overboard again, and the SEAL team took advantage.

Update: Early reports said that Phillips had jumped overboard, but it seems that snipers took out the pirates with Phillips still on the boat. Still not sure how that all worked what with an enclosed lifeboat and all, but I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Impotence

This first paragraph from a foxnews.com piece on the standoff between the US Navy and Somali pirates just about made me have a stroke:

U.S. talks with pirates holding American ship captain Richard Phillips broke down this weekend, with Somali officials blaming a U.S. insistence that the pirates must be arrested, The New York Times reported.

OK. Setting aside for the moment the fact that the term "Somali official" is an oxymoron, what possible objection could "Somali officials" have to arresting the pirates? Surely these "Somali officials" don't endorse or support these outlaws...do they?

Letters of Marque and Reprisal

In a comment to my most recent post on the Somalia piracy problem, my brother Chuck said:

Maybe it's time to issue Letters of Marque and Reprisal. I'll bet a lot of freelancers would jump at the chance!

If you're not familiar with this somewhat archaic legal instrument, a letter of marque permits a private party - a merchant marine, for example - to search, seize or destroy assets or personnel of a foreign party which has committed offenses against the issuing nation.

This got me wondering if there was still a legal basis for letters of marque, and it appears there is. From Wikipedia:

Article 1 of the United States Constitution lists issuing letters of marque and reprisal in Section 8 as one of the enumerated powers of Congress, alongside the power to declare war.

The Wikipedia article goes on to say that the 1856 Treaty of Paris bans the issuance of letters of marque, but the US is not a signatory to the pact and isn't bound by it.

The US last issued a letter of marque during World War 2, and Texas congressman Ron Paul, crazy though he may be, introduced a bill to authorize the issue of letters of marque after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but the bill apparently failed to pass. He introduced a similar bill in 2007 which never made it to committee.