Software Wars

Software Wars

The wink that changed the world

The wink that changed the world. - By Michael Meyer - Slate Magazine

This is the way the Warsaw Pact folded, not with a bang but a gesture.

By Michael MeyerPosted Monday, July 6, 2009, at 9:26 AM ET

Nicolae Ceaucescu in Bucharest in 1989

On July 7, 1989, the masters of the Eastern empire gathered in Bucharest for a fateful summit. They were a rogue's gallery of the world's dictators, assembled in the capital of the worst among them: Romania's own Nicolae Ceausescu, Europe's last Stalinist, the dark lord of the old Eastern bloc's most repressive Communist regime.

They were the hunters: Erich Honecker, the murderous boss of the German Democratic Republic, architect of the wall that separated his East Germany from the West. There was Poland's Wojciech Jaruzelski, the man who declared martial law in 1980 and broke the famed trade union Solidarity. Czechoslovak strongman Milos Jakes was there, as well as Bulgaria's Todor Zhivkov, whose secret police stooges once tried to assassinate Pope John Paul II.

This day, however, the hunted was one of their own: reformist Hungarian Prime Minister Miklos Nemeth, whose determination to bring democracy and free markets to his country threatened them all. And so, in the interests of self-preservation, the satraps of the Warsaw Pact marshaled their forces. The goal: a classically Commie "fraternal intervention" of the sort the world had seen before—Hungary in 1956 and Prague in 1968. Only one man stood between them and their quarry. His name: Mikhail Gorbachev.

For many, the fall of the Berlin Wall in November 1989 was a glorious moment, emblematic of the West's victory in the Cold War. It seemed to come out of the blue. But if you watched the Eastern bloc's disintegration from the ground, over the course of that epic year, you know that the process was far longer and more complex than most people realize. Often, it unfolded in melodramatic little chapters, unnoticed by the rest of the world, as on that fine summer day in Bucharest two decades ago.

To grasp the full dimension of that drama, you must remember how Europe was still locked in the old order defined by the Cold War—and glimpse the changes afoot that would, abruptly, transform it. Nemeth arrived on the scene in late November 1988 as a new-generation "reform" Communist in the mold of Gorbachev himself. But if his titular master in Moscow remained a committed socialist, however liberal by contrast to his old-guard predecessors, Nemeth was the real deal.

Moving quickly, he had drafted a new constitution for Hungary—modeled on America's, complete with a Bill of Rights and guarantees of free speech and human rights. Then he allowed new political parties to form and promised free elections. And if the Communist Party should lose, hard-liners asked, what then? Why, said Nemeth, with perfect equanimity, "We step down." Worst, just a few months before, in early May, Nemeth had announced that Hungary would tear down the fence along its frontier with Austria. At the height of the Cold War, he cut a hole in the Iron Curtain.

In the Communist world, this was heresy. It had to be punished. And so it was that the Warsaw Pact's leaders assembled in Bucharest. Seated in a great hall, surrounded by banners and the full pomp of Communist circumstance, they launched their attack. Ceausescu went first, brandishing his fists and shouting an impassioned indictment: "Hungary will destroy socialism." His "dangerous experiments" will destroy the entire Socialist Union! Honecker, Jakes, and Zhivkov followed. Only Jaruzelski of Poland sat quiet, sphinxlike behind his dark sunglasses, betraying no emotion.

Nemeth had been in office for only seven months. This was his first Warsaw Pact summit. He was nervous, but he knew his enemies would act only with Soviet support. The man who could give it sat roughly opposite him, 30 feet away on the other side of a large rectangle of flag-draped conference tables. As Ceausescu and the others ranted on, calling for armed intervention in Hungary, Nemeth glanced across at the Soviet leader. Their eyes met, and Gorbachev … winked.

"This happened at least four or five times," Nemeth later told me. "Strictly speaking, it wasn't really a wink. It was more a look, a bemused twinkle. Each time he smiled at me, with his eyes, it was as if Gorbachev were saying, 'Don't worry. These people are idiots. Pay no attention.' " And so he didn't. As the dogs of the Warsaw Pact brayed for his head, Nemeth went outside to smoke a cigarette.

On this small moment, history turned. Nemeth flew back to Budapest and continued his reforms, dissolving the country's Communist Party and opening Hungary's borders so that tens of thousands of East Germans could famously escape to the West—and causing, four months later, the Berlin Wall to topple. Erich Honecker went home a spent political force who would be ousted in a coup d'état that began taking shape even before he left Bucharest. As for Nicolae Ceausescu, he would die by firing squad during the revolution that convulsed Romania at year's end.

The Grid, Our Cars and the Net: One Idea to Link Them All

The Grid, Our Cars and the Net: One Idea to Link Them All | Autopia

Autopia Planes, Trains, Automobiles and the Future of Transportation

By David Weinberger
May 8, 2009
11:57 am

Editor's note: Robin Chase thinks a lot about transportation and the internet, and how to link them. She connected them when she founded Zipcar, and she wants to do it again by making our electric grid and our cars smarter. Time magazine recently named her one of the 100 most influential people of the year. David Weinberger sat down with Chase to discuss her idea.

Robin Chase considers the future of electricity, the future of cars and the internet three terms in a single equation, even if most of us don't yet realize they're on the same chalkboard. Solve the equation correctly, she says, and we create a greener future where innovation thrives. Get it wrong, and our grandchildren will curse our names.

Chase thinks big, and she's got the cred to back it up. She created an improbable network of automobiles called Zipcar. Getting it off the ground required not only buying a fleet of cars, but convincing cities to dedicate precious parking spaces to them. It was a crazy idea, and it worked. Zipcar now has 6,000 cars and 250,000 users in 50 towns.

Now she's moving on to the bigger challenge of integrating a smart grid with our cars – and then everything else. The kicker is how they come together. You can sum it up as a Tweet: The intelligent network we need for electricity can also turn cars into nodes. Interoperability is a multiplier. Get it right!

Robin Chase

Chase starts by explaining the smart grid. There's broad consensus that our electrical system should do more than carry electricity. It should carry information. That would allow a more intelligent, and efficient, use of power.

"Our electric infrastructure is designed for the rare peak of usage," Chase says. "That's expensive and wasteful."

Changing that requires a smart grid. What we have is a dumb one. We ask for electricity and the grid provides it, no questions asked. A smart grid asks questions and answers them. It makes the meter on your wall a sensor that links you to a network that knows how much power you're using, when you're using it and how to reduce your energy needs – and costs.

Such a system will grow more important as we become energy producers, not just consumers. Electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids will return power to the grid. Rooftop solar panels and backyard wind turbines will, at times, produce more energy than we can store. A smart grid generates what we need and lets us use what we generate. That's why the Obama Administration allocated $4.5 billion in the stimulus bill for smart grid R&D.

This pleases Chase, but it also makes her nervous. The smart grid must be an information network, but we have a tradition of getting such things wrong. Chase is among those trying to convince the government that the safest and most robust network will use open internet protocols and standards. For once the government seems inclined to listen.

Chase switches gears to talk about how cars fit into the equation. She sees automobiles as just another network device, one that, like the smart grid, should be open and net-based.

"Cars are network nodes," she says. "They have GPS and Bluetooth and toll-both transponders, and we're all on our cell phones and lots of cars have OnStar support services."

That's five networks. Automakers and academics will bring us more. They're working on smart cars that will communicate with us, with one another and with the road. How will those cars connect to the network? That's the third part of Chase's equation: Mesh networking.

In a typical Wi-Fi network, there's one router and a relatively small number of devices using it as a gateway to the internet. In a mesh network, every device is also a router. Bring in a new mesh device and it automatically links to any other mesh devices within radio range. It is an example of what internet architect David Reed calls "cooperative gain" - the more devices, the more bandwidth across the network. Chase offers an analogy to explain it.

"Wi-Fi is like a bridge that connects the highways on either side of the stream," she says. "You build it wide enough to handle the maximum traffic you expect. If too much comes, it gets congested. When not enough arrives, you've got excess capacity. Mesh takes a different approach: Each person who wants to cross throws in a flat rock that's above the water line. The more people who do that, the more ways there are to get across the river."

Cooperative gain means more users bring more capacity, not less. It's always right-sized. Of course, Chase points out, if you're trying to go a long distance, you're ultimately forced back onto the broadband bridge where the capacity is limited. But for local intra-mesh access, it's a brilliant and counter-intuitive strategy.

Mesh networking as a broad-based approach to networking is growing. A mesh network with 240 nodes covers Vienna. Similar projects are underway in Barcelona, Athens, the Czech Republic and, before long, in two areas of Boston not far from the cafe we're sitting in. But the most dramatic examples are the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Today in Iraq and Afghanistan, soldiers and tanks and airplanes are running around using mesh networks," said Chase. "It works, it's secure, it's robust. If a node or device disappears, the network just reroutes the data."

And, perhaps most important, it's in motion. That's what allows Chase's plural visions to go singular. Build a smart electrical grid that uses Internet protocols and puts a mesh network device in every structure that has an electric meter. Sweep out the half dozen networks in our cars and replace them with an open, Internet-based platform. Add a mesh router. A nationwide mesh cloud will form, linking vehicles that can connect with one another and with the rest of the network. It's cooperative gain gone national, gone mobile, gone open.

Chase's mesh vision draws some skepticism. Some say it won't scale up. The fact it's is being used in places like Afghanistan and Vienna indicates it could. Others say moving vehicles may not be able to hook into and out of mesh networks quickly enough. Chase argues it's already possible to do so in less than a second, and that time will only come down. But even if every car and every electric meter were meshed, there's still a lot of highway out there that wouldn't be served, right? Chase has an answer for that, too.

"Cars would have cellular and Wi-Fi as backups," she said.

The economics are right, she argues. Rather than over-building to handle peak demand and letting capacity go unused, we would right-size our infrastructure to provide exactly what we need, when we need it, with minimum waste and maximum efficiency.

"There's an economy of network scale here," she says. "The traffic-light guys should be interested in this for their own purposes, and so should the power-grid folks and the emergency responders and the Homeland Security folks and, well, everyone. Mesh networks based on open standards are economically justifiable for any one of these things. Put them together - network the networks – and for the same exact infrastructure spend, you get a ubiquitous, robust, resilient, open communication platform — ripe for innovation — without spending a dollar more."

The time is right, too. There's $7.2 billion in the stimulus bill for broadband, $4.5 billion for the smart grid and about $5 billion for transportation technology. The Transportation Reauthorization bill is coming up, too. At $300 billion it is second only to education when it comes to federal discretionary spending. We are about to make a huge investment in a set of networks. It will be difficult to gather the political and economic will to change them once they are deployed.

"We need to get this right, right now," Chase says.

Build each of these infrastructures using open networking standards and we enable cooperative gain at the network level itself. Get it wrong and we will have paved over a generational opportunity.

David Weinberger is a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. E-mail him at self@evident.com.

Guantanamero

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/Pictures/2007/06/05/guantanamo460.jpg

David Hicks became one of the many imprisoned without charge at Guantanamo Bay.

David Hicks, a young Australian serving as a footsoldier with the Taliban in Afghanistan, was captured by the Northern Alliance near Kunduz and handed over, for a $1,000 bounty, to the US authorities. On 11 January, 2002, Hicks was transferred to the US military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to become one of hundreds of people imprisoned without charge in the name of the global "war on terror".

In Australia, Hicks's plight met with widespread indifference. Despite persistent allegations of abuse and torture against the US authorities and the troubling legal implications of Hicks's incarceration, the Australian public was in no mood to feel any sympathy for a man described as one of the world's most dangerous terrorists. Hicks languished in prison for five years. He was hastily returned to prison in Australia in May 2007, after a controversial military trial. This change was helped by a determined and often lonely campaign by his father, Terry Hicks, an ordinary Adelaide man who simply wants a fair trial for his son.

Royal Navy in firefight with Somali pirates

From Times Online

November 12, 2008

Pirates caught redhanded by one of Her Majesty’s warships after trying to hijack a cargo ship off Somalia made the grave mistake of opening fire on two Royal Navy assault craft packed with commandos armed with machineguns and SA80 rifles.

In the ensuing gunfight, two Somali pirates in a Yemeni-registered fishing dhow were killed, and a third pirate, believed to be a Yemeni, suffered injuries and subsequently died. It was the first time the Royal Navy had been engaged in a fatal shoot-out on the high seas in living memory.

By the time the Royal Marines boarded the pirates’ vessel, the enemy had lost the will to fight and surrendered quietly. The Royal Navy described the boarding as “compliant”.

The dramatic confrontation, the latest in a series of piracy incidents in the Gulf of Aden in recent months, took place 60 miles south of the Yemeni coast and involved the Royal Navy Type 22 frigate, HMS Cumberland, which has a Royal Marine unit on board, on short-notice standby to engage in “non-compliant boardings”.

HMS Cumberland, on anti-piracy patrol as part of a Nato maritime force, detected the dhow which was towing a skiff, and identified it as a vessel which had been involved in an attack on the Danish-registered MV Powerful earlier yesterday. The pirates had opened fire on the cargo boat with assault rifles.

Under rules of engagement which allows the Royal Navy to intervene when pirates are positively identified, the commandos were dispatched from the frigate in rigid-raider craft and sped towards the pirates’ dhow. The Ministry of Defence said the Marines circled the pirates’ boat to try and persuade them to stop.

As they approached, however, several of the pirates, a mixed crew of Somalis and Yemenis, swung their assault rifles in their direction and opened fire. The MoD said the Royal Marines returned fire “in self defence”, and then boarded the dhow — a stolen Yemeni-registered fishing vessel.

The commandos found guns and other “paraphernalia” on board the dhow and a handful of terrified pirates. The MoD said it was unclear whether the Yemeni who died had been shot by the Marines or was wounded from a previous incident involving the pirates.

The gun battle was in stark contrast to the Royal Navy’s last encounter with a boatful of armed men - when crew members of HMS Cornwall, also a Type 22 frigate, patrolling in the Gulf in rigid raiders, were surrounded by heavily armed Iranian Revolutionary Guards in March last year. Eight sailors, including a woman, Leading Seaman Faye Turney, and seven Marines were taken hostage without a shot being fired, and detained for 13 days. The Commons Defence Committee described the incident as “a national embarrassment”.

Yesterday’s battle signalled a new policy of maximum robustness for the Royal Navy on the high seas. Captain Mike Davis-Marks, a senior spokesman for the Navy, said: “This is bound to have an impact on pirates who for the last two years have been getting away with seizing vessels and receiving large ransoms. Now suddenly there’s the threat of death and this may force them to think again, but they are determined people, so we’ll have to see.”

The Russians claimed a helicopter based on their own frigate Neustrashimy had also taken part in yesterday’s battle, though the Royal Navy knew nothing about it. The Royal Marine commandos who boarded the pirates’ dhow were supported by a Lynx helicopter from HMS Cumberland, the MoD said.

Photographer Veronique de Viguerie spends time with the Central Regional Coast Guard, the main pirate group operating off the coast of Somalia

Abdul Hassan carries a rocket-propelled grenade near a small boat with some of his crew. This pirate group, called the Central Regional Coast Guard, was formed three years ago, has 350 men in its ranks and about 100 speedboats.

In 2008, the group attacked 29 ships, earning $10m (£6m). Abdul Hassan, who pocketed $350,000, arrived with a small crew on a beach near Hobyo, on the border between Galmudug and Puntland states, before going on an attack to another ship

Photograph: Veronique de Viguerie/Getty Images

Abdul Hassan, 39, is nicknamed "the one who never sleeps"

Abdul Hassan carries a rocket-propelled grenade on a small boat with some of his crew

The Central Regional Coast Guard in the waters off Somalia

From Hobyo's beach, three different ships captured by the pirates can be seen. The one pictured is Japanese, and was attacked in September. The ship and its crew will remain there until the end of the negotiations between the pirates and the ship's insurance company. The Ukrainian ship MV Faina is also nearby, but is too far out to sea to be seen from the beach

On Wednesday October 29 2008, the Somalian president gave the greenlight for foreign troops to attack pirates within Somalian territory. In response, pirates are getting ready for the fight. A convoy of five trucks, each carrying five boats, goes through Galcayo on its way to Hobyo to supply the pirates

This Hobyo Branch store in Galkayo is supplying the pirates with food, drink and cigarettes. They call the owner to order what they need; then a truck goes from Galkayo to Hobyo with the items and sells them to the pirates for twice the normal price, partly contributing the country's inflation

Galkayo is in the centre of Somalia, near the states of Hobyo and Puntland, and also near Ethiopia. Despite its strategic location, the city remains very poor, unemployment is very high and violence is part of everyday life. Pirates have a relatively high standing and are starting to build themselves big houses and businesses with their money. Now they represent the dream of success for many of the men living in Galkayo

Due to the security risks in Somalia, visitors require private escorts of armed men at all times to avoid being attacked by the different militias operating in the area. Fifteen armed men were required as escorts for the photographer, Veronique de Viguerie

Persia & Pirates

"After travelling more than 4,000 maritime miles an Iranian warship entered the Gulf of Aden to protect Iranian ships against pirates," reported the Iranian state radio, but gave no further details.

An unnamed official said the gulf was an international area and that Iran's armed forces would "carry out any decision made by their superiors".

The Iranian force joins ships from the EU, US, India, Russia, Malaysia and others which are already patrolling in the area.

China has also said it is considering sending a defensive force to the Gulf.

In October, Iran paid a ransom to free the crew of a captured merchant ship, and an Iranian-operated cargo ship carrying 36,000 tonnes of wheat was seized in November.

Pirate attacks are a regular occurrence in the Gulf of Aden, with many countries blaming the breakdown of law and order in Somalia.

World leaders have called for greater action to deal with the problem and last week, the UN approved a resolution allowing foreign troops to pursue pirates on land in Somalia.

The Russian Approach To The Somali Pirates

by James Dunnigan
December 20, 2008

The Russian frigate Neustrashimy (Fearless), was dispatched on September 28th in response to the capture of the Ukrainian freighter Faina with a crew of 21 people and 2,320 tonnes of military hardware that reportedly included battle tanks and armoured vehicle spares, while on its way to the Kenyan port of Mombasawas, on September 25th, 2008. The cargo was destined to the South Congo Government.

In recent months, a multinational taskforce based in Djibouti has been patrolling parts of the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea.

French naval commandos have taken action against pirates who seized two sailing vessels with French citizens aboard and arrested a dozen suspects. They were brought to France and are awaiting trial on charges of hijacking, hostage-taking and armed robbery, which carry life sentences.

Russia is now planning to send more warships to the Somali coast, along with some commandos and a particularly Russian style of counter-piracy operations. In other words, the Russians plan to go old school on the Somali pirates, and use force to rescue ships currently held, and act ruthlessly against real or suspected pirates it encounters at sea.

This could cause diplomatic problems with the other nations providing warships for counter-piracy operations off the Somali coast. That's because the current ships have, so far, followed a policy of not attempting rescue operations (lest captive sailors get hurt) and not firing on pirates unless fired on first. Russia believes this approach only encourages the pirates.

Russia is planning on bringing along commandoes from Spetsgruppa Vympel. These are hostage rescue experts, formed two decades ago as a spinoff from the original Russian army Spetsnaz commandos. This came about when various organizations in the Soviet government decided that they could use a few Spetsnaz type troops for their own special needs. Thus in the 1970s and 80s there appeared Spetsnaz clones called Spetsgruppa. The most use of these was Spetsgruppa Alfa (Special Group A), which was established in 1974 to do the same peacetime work as the U.S. Delta Force or British SAS. In other words; anti-terrorist assignments or special raids. It was Spetsgruppa Alfa that was sent to Kabul, Afghanistan, in 1980 to make sure the troublesome Afghan president Amin and his family were eliminated from the scene (killed.) Survivors (members of the presidential palace staff) of the Spetsgruppa Alfa assault reported that the Spetsnaz troopers systematically hunted down and killed their targets with a minimum of fuss. Very professional. The surviving Afghans were suitably impressed. Spetsgruppa Alfa now belongs to the FSB (successor to the KGB) and number about 300 men (and a few women.) At the same time Spetsgruppa Alfa was established, another section of the KGB organized Spetsgruppa Vympel. This group was trained to perform wartime assassination and kidnapping jobs for the KGB. The FSB also inherited Spetsgruppa Vympel, which is a little smaller than Spetsgruppa Alpha and is used mainly for hostage rescue.

Meanwhile, piracy has been a growing problem off the Somali coast for over a decade. The problem now is that there are hundreds of experienced pirates. And these guys have worked out a system that is very lucrative, and not very risky. For most of the past decade, the pirates preyed on foreign fishing boats and the small, often sail powered, cargo boats the move close (within a hundred kilometers) of the shore. During that time, the pirates developed contacts with businessmen in the Persian Gulf who could be used to negotiate (for a percentage) the ransoms with insurance companies and shipping firms. The pirates also mastered the skills needed to put a grappling hook on the railing, 30-40 feet above the water, of a large ship. Doing this at night, and then scrambling aboard, is more dangerous if the ship has lookouts, who can alert sailors trained to deploy high pressure fire hoses against the borders.

Few big ships carry any weapons, and most have small crews (12-30 sailors). Attacking at night finds most of the crew asleep. Rarely do these ships have any armed security. Ships can post additional lookouts when in areas believed to have pirates. Once pirates (speedboats full of armed men) are spotted, ships can increase speed (a large ship running at full speed, about 40+ kilometers an hour, can outrun most of the current speed boats the pirates have), and have fire hoses ready to be used to repel boarders. The pirates will fire their AK-47 assault rifles and RPG grenade launchers, but the sailors handling the fire hoses will stand back so the gunmen cannot get a direct shot.

Since the pirates take good care of their captives, the anti-piracy efforts cannot risk a high body count, lest they be accused of crimes against humanity, war crimes or simply bad behavior. The pirates have access to hundreds of sea going fishing boats, which can pretend to fish by day, and sneak up on merchant ships at night. The pirates often operate in teams, with one or more fishing boats acting as lookouts, and alerting another boat that a large, apparently unguarded, ship is headed their way. The pirate captain can do a simple calculation to arrange meeting the oncoming merchant vessel in the middle of the night. These fishing boats can carry inflatable boats with large outboard engines. Each of these can carry four or five pirates, their weapons and the grappling hook projectors needed to get the pirates onto the deck of a large ship. These big ships are very automated, and at night the only people on duty will be on the bridge. This is where the pirates go, to seize control of the ship. The rest of the crew is then rounded up. The pirates force the captain to take the ship to an anchorage near some Somali fishing village. There, more gunmen will board, and stand guard over crew and ship until the ransom is paid. Sometimes, part of the crew will be sent ashore, and kept captive there. The captive sailors are basically human shields for the pirates, to afford some protection from commando attacks.

There has always been the option of a military operation to capture the seaside towns and villages the pirates operate from. But this would include sinking hundreds of fishing boats and speedboats. Hundreds of civilians would be killed or injured. Unless the coastal areas were occupied (or until local Somalis could maintain law and order), the pirates would soon be back in business. Pacifying Somalia is an unpopular prospect. Given the opprobrium heaped on the U.S. for doing something about Iraq, no one wants to be on the receiving end of that criticism for pacifying Somalia. The world also knows, from over a century of experience, that the Somalis are violent, persistent and unreliable. That's a combination that has made it impossible for the Somalis to even govern themselves. In the past, what is now Somalia has been ruled, by local and foreign rulers, through the use of violent methods that are no longer politically acceptable. But now the world is caught between accepting a "piracy tax" imposed by the Somalis, or going in and pacifying the unruly country and its multitude of bandits, warlords and pirates.

The piracy "tax" is basically a security surcharge on maritime freight movements. It pays for higher insurance premiums (which in turn pay for the pirate ransoms), danger bonuses for crews and the additional expense of all those warships off the Somali coast. Most consumers would hardly notice this surcharge, as it would increase sea freight charges by less than a percent. Already, many ships are going round the southern tip of Africa, and avoiding Somalia and the Suez canal altogether. Ships would still be taken. Indeed, about a third of the ships seized this year had taken precautions, but the pirates still got them. Warships could attempt an embargo of Somalia, not allowing seagoing ships in or our without a warship escort. Suspicious seagoing ships, and even speedboats, could be sunk in port. That would still produce some videos (real or staged, it doesn't matter) of dead civilians, but probably not so many that the anti-piracy force would be indicted as war criminals.

This sort of bad publicity does not bother the Russians as much as it does other European nations and the United States. Russia got lots of bad press for its brutal, but effective, counter-terror operations in Chechnya. Same with last Augusts invasion of Georgia, which was basically a punitive operation, mainly intended to intimidate the Georgian government. That worked too, despite lots of hostile rhetoric from the U.S. and European nations. If the Russians go old school on the Somali pirates, it will probably work. The Somalis are vicious and clever, but not stupid. Somalis and Russians speak the same language of violence, and the Russians carry a bigger stick. The world will complain, then enjoy the benefits of a piracy free Somali coast.

China & Pirates

China has been rapidly beefing up its navy with new destroyers, submarines and missiles. Naval officers have even been talking about building an aircraft carrier that could help the navy become a "blue-water" force — a fleet capable of operating far from home.

China Navy's destroyers, the Haikou, top left, and the Wuhan, bottom left, and supply ship the...

China Navy's destroyers, the Haikou, top left, and the Wuhan, bottom left, and supply ship the Weishanhu, right, are moored at port before leaving for the Navy's first oversea operation from Sanya, southern China's Hainan province Friday, Dec. 26, 2008. On Friday, warships armed with special forces, missiles and helicopters will sail for anti-piracy duty off Somalia, the first time the communist nation has sent ships on a mission that could involve fighting so far beyond its territorial waters. (AP Photo/Color China Photo)

Denny Roy, a senior fellow at the East-West Center in Hawaii, said the naval buildup and the mission to Somalia are the latest signs that China is no longer willing to rely on the U.S. or other foreign navies to protect its increasingly global interests.

"China has not been dissuaded from entering the field," Roy said. "That leaves open the possibility of a China-U.S. naval rivalry in the future."

Roy predicted China's move would alarm Japan and some in South Korea because both countries have long-standing territorial disputes with China. But he said most Southeast Asian countries may see China's involvement in the anti-piracy campaign as a positive thing. It would mean that China was using its greater military might for constructive purposes, rather than challenging the current international order.

India, another longtime rival of China, would likely welcome the Chinese naval presence off Somalia for the short term, said C. Uday Bhaskar, a former naval commander and retired director of India's Institute of Defense Studies and Analyses. He doubted it would upset the strategic balance.

China's military has not said how long the mission would last, but the state-run China Daily newspaper recently reported the ships would be gone for about three months.

The mission will likely offer Chinese sailors invaluable on-the-job training, according to Stratfor, an Austin, Texas-based intelligence company. The mission will be complex, with crews having to do refueling, resupply and repairs far from home amid the constant threat of pirate attacks.

The waters will also be crowded with naval ships from around the world, testing the Chinese ships' abilities to communicate effectively with other vessels in a common mission that has little central organization.

Chinese Navy sailors march past a warship at port before leaving for the Navy's first oversea...

Chinese Navy sailors march past a warship at port before leaving for the Navy's first oversea operation from Sanya, southern China's Hainan province Friday, Dec. 26, 2008. On Friday, warships armed with special forces, missiles and helicopters will sail for anti-piracy duty off Somalia, the first time the communist nation has sent ships on a mission that could involve fighting so far beyond its territorial waters. (AP Photo/Color China Photo)

The Chinese will very likely monitor the way foreign forces, "especially U.S. warships, communicate with each other and with their shipborne helicopters," the Stratfor report said.

A NATO task force to the Gulf of Aden was recently replaced by a European Union flotilla with four to six ships patrolling the area.

About a dozen other warships, including U.S., German, and Danish ships, are in the region as part of a separate international flotilla based in Bahrain and engaged in anti-terrorism operations. Several individual nations, including Saudi Arabia, Russia, Malaysia and India, also have vessels in the Gulf of Aden.

The China Daily on Friday quoted Rear Adm. Du Jingchen, the mission's chief commander, as saying a total of 1,000 crew members will be on the three Chinese ships.

"We could encounter unforeseen situations," Du was quoted as saying. "But we are prepared for them."

First blood

On Wednesday, 17, nine pirates armed with guns overtook the Chinese ship Zhenhua 4 owned by China Communications Construction Co. and registered in the Caribbean island of St. Vincent.

Captain Peng Weiyuan sent a distress message to the International Maritime Bureau's piracy reporting center in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia as he saw the pirates approaching. The bureau quickly alerted the international naval force, which dispatched two helicopters and a warship.

The 30-member crew used Molotov cocktails and a high-pressure water pipe to stop the pirates, then barricaded themselves inside their living quarters.

The helicopters arrived at the scene 90 minutes later and fired at the pirates, forcing them to flee the ship. There were no injuries among the crew, during the five-hour combat.

The warship and one of the helicopters that responded were Malaysian and the other helicopter was part of the Combined Task Force-150, which includes the United States, Denmark, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Britain, Pakistan and Canada. Malaysia cooperates with the task force.

In this photo released by China's Xinhua News Agency, pirates aim weapons on the deck of the Chinese...

Pirates aim weapons on the deck of the Chinese ship "Zhenhua 4" in the Gulf of Aden, on Wednesday, Dec. 17, 2008. (AP Photo/Xinhua)

Meanwhile, in Yemen
The Indian navy handed over 23 pirates arrested in the Gulf of Aden Saturday, 13th, after they threatened a merchant vessel in the lawless waters off the Yemeni coast, a Yemeni security official said.

The Indian sailors boarded two pirate boats and seized what was described as a substantial arms cache and equipment at the time. The security official said the pirates included 12 Somalis and 11 Yemenis.

The handover took place in the southern port of Aden, and the pirates were to be interrogated and charged in court. He stressed that Yemen has the right to try Somali pirates because their arrest took place inside Yemeni waters.

The day After
China said Thursday, 18th, that it plans to dispatch warships to join an international effort battling rampant piracy off the coast of Somalia — the Chinese navy's first major mission outside the Pacific.

"We are making preparations and arrangements to deploy naval ships to the Gulf of Aden for escorting operations," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao.

The Global Times, a newspaper published by the Communist Party, said the fleet could consist of two cruisers armed with guided missiles, special forces and two helicopters and one large supply ship.

For the Chinese navy, which has mainly concentrated on the country's coastal defense, it would mark the first time it has been involved in multilateral operations in modern times, said Christian LeMiere, a senior analyst for Jane's Country Risk, a security intelligence group.

Though China has a huge global commercial maritime presence, the People's Liberation Army Navy has primarily focused on defending China's coast and, until now, limited operations abroad to port calls, goodwill visits and exercises with other navies.

"They're on an actual mission, which could potentially involve combat, albeit of low intensity. That's a real difference," said Lyle Goldstein, director of the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War College. "This is not a dangerous mission — actually, it's the perfect coming out party for the Chinese navy."

China has never sent military forces overseas other than as part of a U.N.-mandated peacekeeping mission, according to Bonnie Glaser, a China specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. A Foreign Ministry announcement Thursday that China was making preparations to deploy warships followed a unanimous U.N. Security Council vote this week authorizing nations to conduct land and air attacks against pirates.

From January to November, 1,265 Chinese ships have passed through the area — an average of three to four vessels a day, he said. About 20 percent of them have come under attack.

This year, there have been seven cases of pirate hijackings involving Chinese ships or crews, he said, including Wednesday's attack.

In Washington, Pentagon spokesman Maj. Stewart Upton said the U.S. welcomed China's move. "We look forward to working with the Chinese both bilaterally and multilaterally on this challenge to international security," he said.

China's warships would join ships from the U.S., Denmark, Italy, Russia and other countries in patrolling the Gulf of Aden, which is one of the world's busiest waterways and has become infested with heavily armed Somali pirates.

In this Dec. 23, 2008 file photo, German Defence Minister Franz Josef Jung, left, watches German...

Dec. 23, 2008: German Defence Minister Franz Josef Jung, left, watches German frigate Karlsruhe sailing out of the harbor of Djibouti. A helicopter from the warship, which is part of the EU mission protecting civil ships against pirates at the horn of Africa, chased away pirates who were trying to board an Egyptian ship Thursday, Dec. 25, off the coast of Somalia. (AP Photo/Michael Sohn, File)

The Begining of the End

UN Security Council Authorizes Land and Air Attacks on Pirate Bases Along Somalia's Coast

By AHMED AL-HAJ Associated Press Writer
UNITED NATIONS December 16, 2008 (AP)

Eight suspected Somali pirates at the Law Courts in Mombasa Kenya Thursday Dec. 11, 2008. (AP Photo)

On the same day Somali gunmen seized two more ships, the U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Tuesday to authorize nations to conduct land and air attacks on pirate bases on the coast of the Horn of Africa country.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was on hand to push through the resolution, one of President George W. Bush's last major foreign policy initiatives.

Rice said the resolution will have a significant impact, especially since "pirates are adapting to the naval presence in the Gulf of Aden by traveling further" into sea lanes not guarded by warships sent by the U.S. and other countries.

The council authorized nations to use "all necessary measures that are appropriate in Somalia" to stop anyone using Somali territory to plan or carry out piracy in the nearby waters traversed each year by thousands of cargo ships sailing between Asia and the Suez Canal.

That includes the use of Somali airspace, even though the U.S. appeased Indonesia, a council member, by removing direct mention of it, U.S. officials said.

Somalia Foreign Minister Ali Ahmed Jama, whose government asked for the help, said he was "heartened" by the council action. "These acts of piracy are categorically unacceptable and should be put to an end," he said.

The resolution sets up the possibility of increased American military action in Somalia, a chaotic country where a U.S. peacekeeping mission in 1992-93 ended with a humiliating withdrawal of troops after a deadly clash in Mogadishu, as portrayed in the movie "Black Hawk Down."

The commander of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet expressed doubt last week about the wisdom of staging ground attacks on Somali pirates. Vice Adm. Bill Gortney told reporters it is difficult to identify pirates and said the potential for killing innocent civilians "cannot be overestimated."

Rice played down the differences between the State Department and Pentagon, telling reporters that the U.S. was fully committed to preventing pirates from establishing a sanctuary.

"What we do or do not do in cases of hot pursuit we'll have to see, and you'll have to take it case by case," she said. "I would not be here seeking authorization to go ashore if the United States government, perhaps most importantly, the president of the United States, were not behind this resolution."

Pirates have hijacked more than 40 vessels off Somalia's 1,880-mile coastline this year. Before the latest seizures, maritime officials said 14 vessels remained in pirate hands — including a Saudi tanker carrying $100 million worth of crude oil and a Ukrainian ship loaded with tanks and other heavy weapons. Also held are more than 250 crew members.

A member of the Dutch special forces stands guard near the bridge of Dutch cargo ship MV Jumbo...

A member of the Dutch special forces stands guard near the bridge of Dutch cargo ship MV Jumbo Javelin as it passes near the Gulf of Aden on Monday, Dec. 8, 2008.
The Dutch warship De Ruyter, seen in the background, was escorting the cargo ship through the Gulf of Aden, which has become the world's top piracy hotspot this year. Pirates have made an estimated $30 million hijacking ships for ransom this year, seizing 40 vessels off Somalia's 1,880-mile coastline.(AP Photo/Tom Maliti, file)

Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the Vienna, Austria-based U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime, said Tuesday that it is important for nations to jointly confront pirates.

"Regional cooperation is essential," Costa said. "A few years ago, piracy was a threat to the Straits of Malacca (in Southeast Asia). By working together, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand managed to cut the number of attacks by more than half since 2004."

Kenyan Vice President, Kalonzo Musyoka speaks during the opening of the International Conference on Piracy around Somalia at an hotel in Nairobi, Kenya, Thursday, Dec. 11, 2008.
Sitting from left, Charges Petre, Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary General for Somalia, United Nations Special Representative for Somalia Ahmedou Ould Abdalla and Kenyan Foreign Minister Moses Wetangula, right.
(AP Photo/Sayyid Azim)

Kenyan Vice President, Kalonzo Musyoka speaks during the opening of the International Conference on...

Who Are These Pirates?

HILARY G. BROWN
LONDON, Nov. 24, 2008

About 1,000 Somali pirates, have been terrorizing the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean and living like sultans. They are holding 14 ships and about 250 crew members.

Here's a Q&A primer to help clarify this ongoing story.
 

Who Are These Pirates Exactly?

The pirates claimed they were disaffected Somali fishermen operating in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean, whose boats had been challenged and sometimes attacked by unauthorized foreign vessels fishing the same waters. The pirates said their boats were often destroyed and they were forced to flee, according to one of the pirates, a 42 year old father of nine who described himself as "a pirate boss."

In an interview with The Guardian this week, Asad Abdulahi said he and his shipmates considered themselves "heroes running away from poverty.
"We don't see the hijacking as a criminal act but as a road tax," he said, "because we have no central government to control our sea."

How Do the Pirates Operate?

Most are based in the port of Eyl in the state of Somalia, which has had no government to speak of for 20 years. They put to sea in a "mother ship" that took them into the shipping lanes, several hundred miles offshore. They then launched small speedboats armed with little more than AK 47's, grenades and grappling irons to haul themselves up onto the deck of a ship. Generally, they can sieze a ship without firing a shot.

How Many Ships Have Been Hijacked?

The Somali pirates have captured 39 ships so far this year, the biggest prize being the huge, Saudi-owned Sirius Star, whose cargo included 2 million barrels of oil, seized Nov. 15 by a handful of pirates, 450 miles off the coast of East Africa. The Saudi foreign minister has said that his government does not negotiate with hijackers but added, significantly, that "what the ship owners do, is up to them."

What many ship owners do is pay up. Ransoms worth an estimated $150 million have been paid in the past year, by approximately 25 shipowners, in payments dropped in sacks, by helicopter or packed into waterproof suitcases and floated on boats toward an agreed pickup point.

Can't Anyone Stop These Pirates?

An Indian frigate managed to sink a "mother ship" last week. But there are restrictions on naval boats, described in the next answer.

Somalia is an impoverished, failed state, and the pirates have been throwing their ransom money around, building huge villas, importing expensive cars, opening restaurants and generally winning popular support in their home port of Eyl. But this week, heavily armed Islamists reportedly moved into the port of Haradheere, where the Sirius Star is anchored. The Islamists said they would punish the pirates for "seizing a Muslim ship." But analysts said they are probably more interested in a cut of the ransom, if and when it's paid.

What Can the Ships Do to Protect Themselves?
The simple answer is, avoid the Indian Ocean, Gulf of Aden and the Suez Canal. But that, of course, means taking enormous, costly detours around the entire African continent, past the Cape of Good Hope in South Africa, to reach the Mediterranean and European ports. This southern route adds 12 to 15 days to each voyage, at a cost of $20,000 to $30,000 a day.

Nine countries now have warships in the area, including Russia, France, Malaysia, Denmark and part of the U.S. 5th Fleet, based in Bahrain. Turkish and British frigates also run patrols in the Gulf of Aden. But the navies are operating under a restrictive United Nations mandate that does not allow them to actually board hijacked vessels . The Indian frigate that sank a pirate ship last week seems to have been a one- time event.

Some shipping companies have considered hiring private security companies to protect their ships, even arming the ship's crews, though merchant ships are by law generally prohibited from carrying weapons.

The International Maritime Organization advises ships that continue to sail through these pirate-infested waters to sail at night, which is not terribly helpful, since they still have the other 12 hours of daylight to worry about. It also said that crews should "batten down the hatches, and try using high-pressure fire hoses against the pirates as they approach the ship in their small speedboats." 

How Many Hostages Have Died in This Wave of Piracy?

As far as we know, none. Captured crew members said on release that they were well treated by the pirates who told them not to be frightened, because "you are poor people like us."

Indians & Pirates

DANA HUGHES and LUIS MARTINEZ
NAIROB, Kenya Nov. 20, 2008

The head of the piracy reporting center today applauded the Indian warship that blasted a suspected pirate ship and said such muscle flexing by the world's navies was long overdue. "It's about time that such a forceful action is taken. It's an action that everybody is waiting for," Noel Choong, who heads the International Maritime Bureau's piracy reporting center in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, told The Associated Press.

The Indian warship, the Tabar, tried to stop a ship that matched the description of a pirate "mother ship" in the Gulf of Aden where numerous ships have been attacked by pirates. Rather than be boarded, the pirates fired on the Tabar. The warship fired back, starting fires on the pirate vessel and triggering several explosions that destroyed the ship.

"If all warships do this, it will be a strong deterrent. But if it's just a rare case, then it won't work" to control the unprecedented level of piracy in the Gulf of Aden, he said.

There is no consensus among the world's powers, however, to go after the pirates despite the fact that the ships that have been captured are anchored in clear view off the coast of Somalia.

The U.S. Navy said Wednesday that it's not about to use its military might to free a giant oil tanker or any other ship captured by Somali pirates because if naval forces recover one ship, they would have to recover them all.

Besides, a Pentagon official asked, what would they do with all the captured pirates?

The U.S. Fifth Fleet has dozens of ships patrolling the pirate-infested waters off the Somali coast in the Gulf of Aden and in the Indian Ocean. They have been joined by warships from several other nations trying to create a safe corridor through the busy shipping lanes.

Nevertheless, 95 ships have been attacked and 39 captured so far this year. Seventeen of those ships, including the massive Saudi supertanker Sirius Star, with its $100 million load of crude, remain in pirate hands.

The Sirius Star is anchored several miles off the Somali coast as ransom negotiations begin to heat up.

Arms length

Another captured ship, the MV Faina, was seized by pirates in September and quickly cornered by U.S. warships. But since then, the U.S. crews have simply watched the Faina, its holds filled with weapons, to make sure its deadly cargo doesn't slip away to militants ashore.

Shipping companies cheered today when news broke that an Indian warship attacked and destroyed a pirate "mother ship" that fired on it rather than be boarded.

But the rare military action raised the question why the world's navies didn't simply take back the stolen ships.

A Navy official told ABC News that if the Navy rescued one ship then it would have to start doing it for all. There are 17 ships currently being held hostage by Somali pirates.

The official added that the Navy is already busy in the region -- carrying out military exercises, watching for terrorists and drug smugglers -- too busy to devote its resources to piracy.

It's up to the shipping companies, argue military officials and the International Maritime Board, to take steps to protect themselves in international water.

And once captured, it is the Navy's view that "negotiations are between the pirates and shipping companies."

More on Somali Pirates

In October 2005 an International Maritime Bureau report documented twenty-three pirate attacks in Somali waters since March 15, 2005. One of the attacks resulted in the Hong Kong-based owner of a liquefied gas tanker paying hijackers $315,000 for the return of the ship after it was seized on April 10, 2005. In another attack on August 15, 2005, three fishing boats and forty-eight Asian fishermen were captured by Somali pirates and held for ransom in Somalia.

The attack on a luxury cruise ship off the coast of Somalia on November 5th, 2005 generated some publicity to the Somali piracy and prompted the cash-strapped Somali government to sign a $50 million contract with an American company to provide protection against pirates, but it is not clear what, if anything, the American company has done about the problem.

Falling on deaf years
The attack on the Seabourn Spirit cruise ship was detered (according to several news sources including USA Today), through the use of a sonic weapon.

It was a long-range acoustic device (LRAD) originally developed for the U.S. Navy by American Technology Corporation of San Diego. The non-lethal weapon was designed to deter attacks on ships like the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000, an attack that was carried out in a Yemeni port by suicide bombers who approached the Cole in a small boat packed with explosives.

The Seabourn Spirit was sailing approximately 100 miles off the coast of Somalia when men on two speedboats fired on the ship with machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades. The ship escaped from the two speedboats after attempting to ram one of them and using the LRAD. One crew member suffered minor injuries from shrapnel. None of the 151 passengers was injured.

LRAD permits broadcasting of messages or sounds (including ear-splitting noises) over long distances. Its use can cause permanent hearing loss at distances of up to 100 yards.

At present, the device is deployed on U.S. Navy ships operating in the Persian Gulf and as part of the force protection kits of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in Iraq. A number of cruise ships also carry the LRAD, which, because the sound it generates is focused in a particular direction, can be used without harming its operators or others not directly in the path of the sonic pulse.

Goings get tough
In the beginning of 2006 there were two encounters between U.S. Navy ships and suspected pirates. In the second (March 18th) two U.S. warships were involved in a clash with suspected pirates off the coast of Somalia early in the morning. Sailors aboard the USS Cape St. George, which was patrolling in the Indian Ocean along with the USS Gonzalez as part of a Dutch-led maritime security operation, fired on a fishing boat in international waters after men aboard the boat brandished a rocket-propelled grenade launcher and fired on the American vessel. One suspect was killed, five were wounded, and twelve others were taken into custody.

Not a bad year after all
The 2006 International Maritime Organization annual Reports on Acts of Piracy and Armed Robbery Against Ships (available here as a .pdf file) put the Somali piracy into context:

• There were 241 "acts of piracy and armed robbery against ships" reported to the IMO in 2006, 25 fewer than in 2005.
• The South China Sea, where there were 66 "incidents," was the most dangerous part of the world (although the Malacca Strait, with 22 "incidents," probably had the most attacks per square mile.
• Ten ships were hijacked. Four of the ten hijackings occurred in the waters off East Africa.
• Thirteen crew members died at the hands of pirates; another 112 were injured.
• There were 180 crew members kidnapped or taken hostage, of which 37 remain unaccounted for.
• The peak month for piracy was April. Like Congress, pirates seem to go into recess in August

Fighting with photons

Oct 30th 2008 From The Economist print edition

LIKE so much else in science fiction, the ray gun was invented by H.G. Wells. In the tentacles of Wells’s Martians it was a weapon as unanswerable by earthlings as the Maxim gun in the hands of British troops was unanswerable by Africans. Science fiction, though, it has remained. Neither hand-held pistols nor giant, orbiting anti-missile versions of the weapon have worked. But that is about to change. The first serious battlefield ray gun is now being deployed. And the next generation, now in the laboratory, is coming soon.

The deployed ray gun (or “directed-energy weapon”, in the tedious jargon that military men seem compelled to use to describe technology) is known as Zeus. It is not designed to kill. Rather, its purpose is to allow you to remain at a safe distance when you detonate unexploded ordnance, such as the homemade roadside bombs that plague foreign troops in Iraq.

This task now calls for explosives. In practice, that often means using a rocket-propelled grenade, so as not to expose troops to snipers. But rockets are expensive, and sometimes miss their targets. Zeus is effective at a distance of 300 metres, and a laser beam, unlike a rocket, always goes exactly where you point it.

Only one god

At the moment, there is only one Zeus in the field. It is sitting in the back of a Humvee in an undisclosed theatre of war. But if it proves successful it will, according to Scott McPheeters of the American army’s Cruise Missile Defence Systems Project Office for Directed Energy Applications, be joined by a dozen more within a year.

If Zeus works, it will make soldiers’ lives noticeably safer. But what would really make a difference would be the ability to destroy incoming artillery rounds. The Laser Area Defence System, LADS, being developed by Raytheon, is intended to do just that—blowing incoming shells and small rockets apart with laser beams. The targets are tracked by radar and (if they are rockets) by infrared sensors. When they come within range, they are zapped.

If it works, LADS will be a disruptive technology in more senses than one. It will probably supersede Raytheon’s Phalanx system, which uses mortars to do the same thing. Phalanx and its competitors require lots of ammunition, and can be overwhelmed by heavy barrages. By contrast, Mike Booen, vice-president of Advanced Missile Defence and Directed Energy Weapons at Raytheon, observes, as long as LADS is supplied with electricity it has “an infinite magazine”.

And LADS is merely the most advanced of a group of anti-artillery lasers under development. Though Raytheon is convinced it is on to a winner and is paying for most of the development costs out of its own pocket, it has received some money from the Directed Energy Weapons Programme Office of the American navy. In August, inter-service rivalry reared its head, when the army handed Boeing a $36m contract to develop a similar weapon, known at the moment as the High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator.

The army’s Space and Missile Defence Command is also in the game. Its Joint High Power Solid State Laser, a prototype of which should be ready next summer, is meant to destroy rockets the size of the Katyushas used by insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq, and by Hizbullah in Lebanon.

The most ambitious laser project of all, though, is the Airborne Laser, or ABL, being developed by the American Missile Defence Agency and Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. The beam is generated by mixing chemicals in a reactor known as a COIL (chemical oxygen iodine laser) and packs a far bigger punch than the electrically generated beams emitted by systems such as LADS. When mounted in the nose-cone of a specially converted Boeing 747, an ABL should be capable of disabling a missile from a distance of several hundred kilometres.

The aim is to hit large ballistic missiles, including ICBMs, just after they are launched—in the boost phase. The ABL is therefore a son of Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars scheme, although in that programme, which dates back to the 1980s, the lasers would have operated from space.

There are many advantages to attacking a missile during its boost phase. First, it is still travelling slowly, so it is easier to hit. Second, it is easy to detect because of its exhaust plume (once the boost phase is over, the engine switches off and the missile follows Newton’s law of gravity to its target). Third, if it has boosters that are designed to be jettisoned, it will be a larger target when it is launched. Fourth, any debris will fall on those who launched it, rather than those at whom it was aimed.

Getting the system to work in practice will be hard, though. A missile launch is observed using an infrared detector. Then the missile must be tracked. When the beam fires, the control system must compensate both for aircraft jitter and for distortions in the beam’s path caused by atmospheric conditions. And ABL-carrying planes must be in the right place at the right time in the first place. Even so, a number of tests have been carried out, and according to Colonel Robert McMurry, the head of the Airborne Laser Programme Office at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico, there will be a full-scale attempt to shoot down a boost-phase missile off the coast of California next summer.

All of which is good news, at least for countries able to deploy the new hardware. But wars are not won by defence alone. What people in the business are more coy about discussing is the offensive use of lasers. At least one such system is under development, though. The aeroplane-mounted Advanced Tactical Laser, or ATL, another chemical laser being put together by Boeing and the American air force, is designed to “neutralise” targets on the ground from a distance of several kilometres. Targeting data will be provided by telescopic cameras on the aircraft, by pictures from satellites and unmanned aerial drones, and by human target-spotters on the ground. The question is: what targets?

The ATL’s supporters discuss such possibilities as disabling vehicles by destroying their wheels and disrupting enemy communications by severing telephone lines. Killing troops is rarely mentioned. However, John Pike, the director of GlobalSecurity.org, a military think-tank in Alexandria, Virginia, who is an expert on ATL, says its main goal is, indeed, to kill enemy combatants.

Surely this is forbidden?

Boeing is unwilling to discuss the matter and John Wachs, the head of the Space and Missile Defence Command’s Directed Energy Division, observes that it is “politically sensitive”. The public may have misgivings about a silent and invisible weapon that would boil the body’s fluids before tearing it apart in a burst of vapour.

That seems oddly squeamish, though. War is not a pleasant business. It is doubtful that being burst by a laser is worse than being hit by a burst from a machine gun. As the Sudanese found out at the Battle of Omdurman in 1898, the year that “The War of the Worlds” was published, that is pretty nasty too.

British and Russian ships fight off Somali pirates

HMS Cumberland helps repel invaders of vessel in Gulf of Aden
Wednesday 12 November 2008

A British frigate and a Russian warship fought off Somali pirates trying to hijack a ship in the Gulf of Aden, both countries' navies said today.

The pirates used assault rifles as they twice tried to seize a Danish vessel, the Powerful, but were repelled by HMS Cumberland and a Russian frigate, the Neustrashimy, the Russian navy said. The defending ships used helicopters in the operation.

"The pirates tried to shoot at the ship using assault rifles and carried out two hijacking attempts," the navy said in a statement.

"The activities of the pirates were thwarted through the joint efforts of the Russian warship and the British warship," it added.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman in London said: "We can confirm that a UK warship yesterday carried out a boarding of a foreign-flagged dhow, suspected of being engaged in piracy. The situation is ongoing."

Cumberland, a type 22 frigate, is on anti-piracy duty in the Gulf of Aden along with another British frigate, Northumberland.

The Royal Navy's website describing Northumberland's activities said last week the vessel had faced "a busy and challenging time" patrolling the Somali coast and that operations included "preventing a number of pirate attacks".

According to Russia's ITAR-Tass news agency, the Neustrashimy, or Fearless, was ordered to accompany the Danish vessel, which is crewed by Russian nationals, at the request of Denmark.

Russia sent the missile-armed frigate to the region in September after pirates seized a Ukrainian freighter carrying military hardware, including grenade launchers and 33 Russian-made tanks. The MV Faina had three Russian citizens among its 21 crew members.

Heavily armed Somali pirate gangs, using speedboats and armed with automatic weapons and rocket-propelled grenades, have captured dozens of ships this year.

They are rarely interested in a ship's cargo, preferring to extract a ransom for the vessel and its crew.

Somalia's weak government, which has no coastguard, says it is powerless to stop the pirates who stalk the busy shipping lanes along the country's 2,300-mile coastline.

In a report last month, the UK-based Chatham House thinktank said there had been at least 61 hijacks or attempted hijacks off Somalia this year. Ransoms paid out could exceed £1m per ship at a cost of around £20m in total.

Insurance premiums had risen tenfold during 2008 and the upsurge in piracy could affect global business, the report said, as shipping companies diverted vessels away from the area.