As many folks know by now the killing of the people on the Quest by Somali pirates as the US Navy and the FBI negotiated for their release is very regrettable. The New York Times printed an article, referenced by yesterday's Security Management Daily newsletter, titled: Seizing of Pirate Commanders Is Questioned. As the US Navy and the FBI attempted to deal with this hostage taking situation they were reportedly unable to talk with land pirate commanders / co-conspirators. So working through their way down the list of options available to them they got to the point where they maneuvered a ship closer to the yacht to attempt "face to face" negotiations. A couple of pirates were brought aboard and eventually a decision was made to detain them as they didn't appear to be negotiating in good faith and the negotiator(s) attempted to open dialog with someone within that group that could negotiate on behalf of the kidnapping pirates and who had the authority to negotiate in good faith. That's probably a more common circumstance than is publically known. I would imagine it is akin to negotiating with prisoners after a prison riot. The negotiators have to work their way through various factions to find a leader who can exercise authority over the rest of the criminals.
Now here's my point to this whole thing. Actually, there's a couple of them. 1) the folks aboard the yacht were apparently sailing in a group prior to being taken over and consciously made a decision to break off from that group and sail into waters known to contain great risk of encountering Somali pirates. So they chose to be there doing that. That was their choice to make and they made it. It would seem they had either a great tolerance for risk or underestimated their either their ability to fend off pirates or their chances of encountering them. Whatever the reason, they apparently made a bad choice. 2) Somali pirates are criminals and there is no such thing as honor among thieves. But the New York Times doesn't note any of that, they just seem to want to paint the US Navy and the FBI in a bad light and since they don't cite who is calling the detention of those pirate commanders into question we are left to believe it is the New York Times themselves. Great, let's blame the folks who volunteer to put themselves into harm's way and protect others, willingly move towards the sound of gun fire and take on the challenge of dealing with very dangerous and dynamic situations, often having to make snap decisions that the arm chair quarterbacks sitting back home in air conditioned offices worrying about the price of gas can call into question while sipping on a vanilla latte.
One quote in the article does at least provide some insight into the issue: “While the pirates clearly knew, from the beginning of our negotiations, that we were not going to allow the Quest to make shore, they gave no warning, no visible signs whatsoever that the hostages’ lives were in danger,” said the military official. The senior law enforcement official added, “These incidents, by their very nature, often move at a rapid pace which requires difficult decisions in real time.”
Whoever those military and senior law enforcement officers are, they phrased their position well. How about let's blame those who committed the crime and urge people not to put themselves at unreasonable risk that will eventually cause those that volunteer to put themselves in harm's way to have to put themselves into harm's way to get the victims of that piracy industry out of hock.
At ITG, we'll send gratitude to the US Navy, the US Navy SEALS who boarded that yacht and took control and the FBI negotiators all of whom are far away from home and who have volunteered to put themselves in harm's way. Apparently, one of the SEALS even had a hand to hand combat situation and came out on top in a knife fight! I don't know that SEAL and he can't see me right now but this Old Soldier is standing at attention and presenting arms to that SEAL and his team, the US Navy and the FBI, none of whom could even get near a vanilla latte.
You can also bet that all of those groups, the SEALS, the Navy task force and the FBI are doing after action reviews and picking the operation apart to see if there are any lessons learned that they can apply the next time they have to put themselves in harm's way to get some pirate victims out of hock.
I bet that the New York Times isn't doing an after action review to figure out why they blame that group publically for the outcome and not the criminals that committed the crime. Frankly, I think that article, though not the worst of breed, illustrates what's wrong with some of the media in this country and not what's wrong with the FBI. To read the article yourself go to:
Subscribe